February 2014 

NASA/TM2014-218162 

NESC-RP-13-00919 

 

NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) 

Enhanced Melamine (ML) 

Foam Acoustic Test (NEMFAT) 

Anne M. McNelis, William O. Hughes, and Mark E. McNelis 

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio 
NASA STI Program . . . in Profile

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to the 

advancement of aeronautics and space science. The 

NASA scientific and technical information (STI) 

program plays a key part in helping NASA maintain 

this important role. 

The NASA STI program operates under the 

auspices of the Agency Chief Information Officer. 

It collects, organizes, provides for archiving, and 

disseminates NASA’s STI. The NASA STI 

program provides access to the NASA Aeronautics 

and Space Database and its public interface, the 

NASA Technical Report Server, thus providing one 

of the largest collections of aeronautical and space 

science STI in the world. Results are published in 

both non-NASA channels and by NASA in the 

NASA STI Report Series, which includes the 

following report types: 

x TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of 

completed research or a major significant phase 

of research that present the results of NASA 

Programs and include extensive data or 

theoretical analysis. Includes compilations of 

significant scientific and technical data and 

information deemed to be of continuing 

reference value. NASA counterpart of peerreviewed formal professional papers, but 

having less stringent limitations on manuscript 

length and extent of graphic presentations. 

x TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientific 

and technical findings that are preliminary or of 

specialized interest, e.g., quick release reports, 

working papers, and bibliographies that contain 

minimal annotation. Does not contain extensive 

analysis. 

x CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientific and 

technical findings by NASA-sponsored 

contractors and grantees. 

x CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. 

Collected papers from scientific and 

technical conferences, symposia, seminars, 

or other meetings sponsored or cosponsored by NASA. 

x SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific, 

technical, or historical information from 

NASA programs, projects, and missions, 

often concerned with subjects having 

substantial public interest. 

x TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. 

English-language translations of foreign 

scientific and technical material pertinent to 

NASA’s mission.

Specialized services also include organizing 

and publishing research results, distributing 

specialized research announcements and feeds, 

providing information desk and personal search 

support, and enabling data exchange services. 

For more information about the NASA STI 

program, see the following: 

x Access the NASA STI program home page 

at http://www.sti.nasa.gov

x E-mail your question to help@sti.nasa.gov

x Fax your question to the NASA STI 

Information Desk at 443-757-5803 

x Phone the NASA STI Information Desk at 

443-757-5802 

x Write to: 

 STI Information Desk 

 NASA Center for AeroSpace Information 

 7115 Standard Drive 

 Hanover, MD 21076-1320
National Aeronautics and 

Space Administration 

Langley Research Center 

Hampton, Virginia 23681-2199 

 

February 2014 

NASA/TM2014-218162 

NESC-RP-13-00919 

 

NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) 

Enhanced Melamine (ML) 

Foam Acoustic Test (NEMFAT) 

Anne M. McNelis, William O. Hughes, and Mark E. McNelis 

Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio 
Available from: 

NASA Center for AeroSpace Information 

7115 Standard Drive 

Hanover, MD 21076-1320 

443-757-5802 

Acknowledgments 

The NEMFAT team would like to thank the following contributors for their 

support: 

x Dr. Curtis E. Larsen/Johnson Space Center (JSC), of the NESC, for 

funding and support of the NEMFAT task. 

x Mr. Joseph M. Roche/GRC of the SLS Payload Fairing project for funding 

the final pretest preparation of the ML foam, and for his overall support. 

x Mr. Thomas Pellegrino/Advanced Resources Inc., Mr. Thomas 

Burns/Soundcoat Company, and Ms. Carrie Cadd/Soundcoat Company for 

their advice on the selection and procurement of the ML foam material. 

x The management and staff of the Riverbank Acoustical Laboratories 

(RAL) for their excellent test services and customer support, especially 

Mr. Eric Wolfram, Mr. Dean A. Victor, Mr. Marc P. Sciaky, and Ms. 

Kimberly A. Scarano. 

x Mr. Noah H. Schiller/Langley Research Center (LaRC) for suggesting the 

use of the DuPontTM LoWaveTM blanket material for future testing.

x Mr. Thomas M. Krivanek/GRC, Ms. Dawn C. Emerson/GRC, Mr. Noah 

H. Schiller/ LaRC, Mr. Steven J. Gentz/Marshall Space Flight Center 

(MSFC), and Mr. Timothy K. Brady/Kennedy Space Center (KSC) for 

their peer review of this report. 

The use of trademarks or names of manufacturers in the report is for accurate reporting and does not 

constitute an official endorsement, either expressed or implied, of such products or manufacturers by the 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

1 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) 

Enhanced Melamine (ML) Foam Acoustic 

Test (NEMFAT) 

December 12, 2013

 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

2 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Report Approval and Revision History 

NOTE: This document was approved at the December 12, 2013, NRB. This document was 

submitted to the NESC Director on January 10, 2014, for configuration control. 

Approved: Original Signature on File 1/13/14 

NESC Director Date 

Version Description of Revision Office of Primary 

Responsibility Effective Date 

1.0 Initial Release Dr. Curtis E. Larsen, 

NASA Technical 

Fellow for Loads and 

Dynamics 

12/12/13
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

3 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Table of Contents 

Technical Assessment Report 

1.0 Notification and Authorization ..................................................................................................... 5

2.0 Signature Page ................................................................................................................................ 6

3.0 Team List ........................................................................................................................................ 7

3.1 Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................. 7

4.0 Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 8

5.0 Assessment Plan ........................................................................................................................... 10

6.0 Problem Description and Background ....................................................................................... 10

7.0 Data Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 11

7.1 Absorption Testing ........................................................................................................... 12

7.2 Transmission Loss Testing ............................................................................................... 15

8.0 Findings, Observations, and NESC Recommendations............................................................ 22

8.1 Findings ............................................................................................................................ 22

8.2 Observations ..................................................................................................................... 22

8.3 NESC Recommendations ................................................................................................. 23

9.0 Alternate Viewpoint ..................................................................................................................... 23

10.0 Other Deliverables ....................................................................................................................... 24

11.0 Lessons Learned ........................................................................................................................... 24

12.0 Recommendations for NASA Standards and Specifications .................................................... 24

13.0 Definition of Terms ...................................................................................................................... 24

14.0 Acronym List ................................................................................................................................ 26

15.0 References ..................................................................................................................................... 27

16.0 Appendices .................................................................................................................................... 27

List of Figures 

Figure 7.1-1. Cross-sectional Views of NEMFAT Absorption Test Configurations ............................. 13

Figure 7.1-2. RAL’s Absorption Test Setup ......................................................................................... 14

Figure 7.1-3. NEMFAT Absorption Test Results .................................................................................. 14

Figure 7.1-4. Comparison of Absorption Coefficients for Melamine Foam versus Fiberglass .............. 15

Figure 7.2-1. Cross-sectional Views of NEMFAT TL Test Configurations .......................................... 16

Figure 7.2-2. RAL’s TL Test Setup for TL13-142 ................................................................................. 17

Figure 7.2-3. NEMFAT TL Test Results................................................................................................ 18

Figure 7.2-4. 2-in.-thick ML Foam Sheet with Mass Barrier at its Center ............................................. 19

Figure 7.2-5. 8-in.-thick Combination Foam Treatment (TL13-144) ..................................................... 20

Figure 7.2-6. TL Comparison of RAL Test Data and VA One Pretest Predictions ............................... 21
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

4 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

List of Tables 

Table 7.0-1. Weight Summary of Test Configurations ......................................................................... 12

List of Appendices 

Appendix A. Proposal for NESC Discipline Enhancing Work .............................................................. 28

Appendix B. Expenditure Cost Breakdown ........................................................................................... 30

Appendix C. RAL Absorption Test Reports .......................................................................................... 31

Appendix D. RAL TL Test Reports ....................................................................................................... 55

 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

5 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Technical Assessment Report

1.0 Notification and Authorization 

Ms. Anne M. McNelis, Mr. William O. Hughes, and Mr. Mark E. McNelis of the NASA Glenn 

Research Center (GRC) requested NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) funding and 

support to plan and perform an acoustic characterization test program of melamine (ML) foam. 

This request was made due to the increasing use of ML foam for payload fairing acoustic 

attenuation by the commercial launch vehicle industry and NASA’s lack of available relevant 

acoustic test data for ML foam. Additionally, it was proposed to test enhanced (with voids) 

ML foam that had been analytically predicted to provide additional acoustic attenuation at low 

frequencies. 

The motivation for the overall request was an identified need to reduce the acoustic interior 

levels for the Space Launch System (SLS) Payload Fairing. The proposed SLS configuration is 

predicted to be the most powerful launch vehicle ever flown, resulting in a need to attenuate the 

resulting extremely harsh acoustic environment. 

The request was made to the NESC Loads and Dynamics Technical Discipline Team on 

December 21, 2012. Dr. Curtis E. Larsen, NASA Technical Fellow for Loads and Dynamics, 

agreed to fund the proposal on January 10, 2013, at the estimated cost of 0.25 full-time 

equivalent (FTE) and $15,000 for procurement. The original proposal is provided in 

Appendix A, and a breakdown of the expenditure costs is provided in Appendix B. The period 

of performance for this work was January through September 2013. The key stakeholders for 

this testing were the SLS Payload Fairing project and the NASA vibro-acoustic community. 

The GRC engineers performing this task adopted the acronym NEMFAT (NESC Enhanced 

Melamine Foam Acoustic Test) for this work. 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

6 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

2.0 Signature Page 

Submitted by: 

Team Signature Page on File - 1/16/14 

Mr. William O. Hughes Date 

Significant Contributors: 

Ms. Anne M. McNelis Date Mr. Mark E. McNelis Date 

Signatories declare the findings, observations, and NESC recommendations compiled in the 

report are factually based from data extracted from program/project documents, contractor 

reports, and open literature, and/or generated from independently conducted tests, analyses, and 

inspections. 

 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

7 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

3.0 Team List 

Name Discipline Organization 

Core Team 

Anne McNelis Team Lead/Structural Dynamics GRC 

William Hughes Structural Dynamics GRC 

Mark McNelis Structural Dynamics GRC 

Consultants 

James Akers Structural Dynamics GRC

Dexter Johnson Chief, Structural Systems Dynamics 

Branch GRC

Administrative Support 

Amanda Thompson Procurement Services GRC 

Sharon Lewis Shipping Coordinator GRC 

Loretta Novakovic Purchasing/Contracting Services GRC/SGT 

Jonay Campbell Technical Writer LaRC/NG 

Engineering Support 

Linda Yoon Structural Dynamics GRC 

Evan Pineda Structural Modeling GRC 

Richard Minter Foam Sizing and Preparation GRC 

Randy Clapper Design Drawings GRC 

3.1 Acknowledgements 

The NEMFAT team would like to thank the following contributors for their support: 

x Dr. Curtis E. Larsen/Johnson Space Center (JSC), of the NESC, for funding and support 

of the NEMFAT task. 

x Mr. Joseph M. Roche/GRC of the SLS Payload Fairing project for funding the final 

pretest preparation of the ML foam, and for his overall support. 

x Mr. Thomas Pellegrino/Advanced Resources Inc., Mr. Thomas Burns/Soundcoat 

Company, and Ms. Carrie Cadd/Soundcoat Company for their advice on the selection and 

procurement of the ML foam material. 

x The management and staff of the Riverbank Acoustical Laboratories (RAL) for their 

excellent test services and customer support, especially Mr. Eric Wolfram, Mr. Dean 

A. Victor, Mr. Marc P. Sciaky, and Ms. Kimberly A. Scarano. 

x Mr. Noah H. Schiller/Langley Research Center (LaRC) for suggesting the use of the 

DuPontTM LoWaveTM blanket material for future testing. 

x Mr. Thomas M. Krivanek/GRC, Ms. Dawn C. Emerson/GRC, Mr. Noah H. Schiller/ 

LaRC, Mr. Steven J. Gentz/Marshall Space Flight Center (MSFC), and Mr. Timothy K. 

Brady/Kennedy Space Center (KSC) for their peer review of this report. 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

8 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

4.0 Executive Summary 

Providing an acceptable acoustic environment to avoid damaging a payload during launch is 

critical to the success of the payload’s mission. Acoustic attenuation systems normally are 

utilized within the payload fairing to aid in the attenuation of acoustic noise. In the past, 

attenuation systems consisting of fiberglass blankets have been utilized for this purpose. More 

recently, the launch vehicle industry is adopting the use of foam, particularly melamine (ML) 

foam, for this purpose. 

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) funded a proposal to achieve initial basic 

acoustic characterization of ML foam, which could serve as a starting point for a future, more 

comprehensive acoustic test program for ML foam. A project plan was developed and 

implemented to obtain acoustic test data for both normal and enhanced ML foam. This project 

became known as the NESC Enhanced Melamine Foam Acoustic Test (NEMFAT). 

Because the NEMFAT project was limited to a budget of $15,000, consideration had to be given 

to balancing the cost of the foam materials with the cost of testing. Additional thought was given 

to balancing the simplicity of the foam configurations and interpretation of the test data versus 

testing a realistic flight-like acoustic attenuation system configuration. 

The decision was ultimately made to purchase seven sheets of ML foam from the Soundcoat 

Company. Each sheet was 4 ft × 8 ft × 2 in. in dimension. Five sheets were “standard” density 

(0.562 lb/ft3

) gray melamine (ML) foam. One sheet was yellow ML “ultralight” (UL) foam, 

which has a lighter density (0.375 lb/ft3) than the standard ML foam. One sheet was the 

“standard” density gray ML foam with an internal Sonic 5666 mass barrier (60 oz./yd2

) placed 

midway in the thickness. A representative fiber-reinforced foam (FRF) panel was utilized as the 

mounting base panel. 

Enhancements were also made to two of the gray ML foam sheets. Voids and mass inclusions 

were investigated with these enhancements. These enhancement ideas were based in part on 

previous work [refs. 1 and 2] within the aerospace industry. 

Acoustic testing was conducted at the Riverbank Acoustical Laboratories (RAL), located in 

Geneva, IL. RAL performed three absorption tests per the American Society for Testing and 

Materials (ASTM) C423 [ref. 3] and six transmission loss (TL) tests per ASTM E90 [ref. 4] for 

the NEMFAT project. The tests actually performed exceeded the test matrix scope laid out in 

the original proposal. The testing at RAL was performed on July 9–10, 2013. 

The results of these tests are summarized in Section 7.0. Every individual ML foam sheet was 

2 in. thick. The thicker 4-in. and 8-in. test configurations were assembled by layering the 

appropriate number and type of 2-in.-thick ML foam and ML UL foam sheets. 

The absorption coefficients for both the 2-in. and the 4-in. thicknesses of ML foam were 

measured; the data showed that ML foam has a higher absorption over a broader and higher 

frequency range relative to previously tested 3-in.-thick fiberglass blankets. However, it should 

be noted that, unlike the fiberglass blanket, the ML foam test article did not include a cover sheet 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

9 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

material, which could affect these absorption results. These results also showed that the 

absorption at low frequencies is improved by increasing the thickness of the ML foam. 

The TLs were measured for (a) the 4-in. ML foam, (b) the 4-in. ML foam with a mass barrier, 

and (c) the 8-in. ML UL foam/ML foam combination with a mass barrier. It was found that ML 

foam augmented the TL of the baseline panel above 200 Hertz (Hz). The addition of the mass 

barrier provided additional TL performance, again above 200 Hz. Of the six NEMFAT test 

configurations, the 8-in.-thick combination of ML UL foam and ML foam with a mass barrier 

provided the greatest TL performance. 

Limited testing was also performed by enhancing the ML foam using voids (for both the 

absorption and the TL tests) and mass inclusions (for the TL tests only). The acoustic 

performances of the enhanced ML foam and the normal ML foam were similar for the three 

enhanced configurations tested. 

The NEMFAT project was successful in that it established an initial database of acoustic 

properties of ML foam. This database can be used as the baseline for future, more elaborate 

testing of ML foam. It is recommended that ML foam be considered in the development of 

acoustic attenuation systems for the Space Launch System (SLS) Payload Fairing project due to 

its improved acoustic performance and lighter mass relative to fiberglass blankets. 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

10 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

5.0 Assessment Plan 

The NEMFAT task was performed according to the original task proposal, as defined in 

Appendix A. The exceptions to this plan were: 

a) An absorption test of the bare panel was not performed due to lack of materials. The 

necessary surface area of the bare panel material was not available to properly conduct 

this test. 

b) Additional tests were performed beyond those called out in the original task proposal. 

The original proposal called for three absorption tests and three TL tests. A total of three 

absorption tests and six TL tests were actually performed, providing additional test data 

and value beyond the scope of the original proposal. 

c) Not all of the $15,000 of procurement money was needed for the NEMFAT testing. With 

the permission of Dr. Curtis Larsen, additional materials were purchased post-testing. 

The LoWaveTM blanket materials purchased will be assessed in future testing. 

LoWaveTM is a DuPont Company product that utilizes mass inclusions to tune an acoustic 

blanket for improvements in TL at specific frequencies. 

6.0 Problem Description and Background 

The SLS Payload Fairing is currently being developed at the Glenn Research Center (GRC). The 

fairing is expected to be exposed to an unprecedented high external acoustic environment during 

its liftoff phase due to the increased propulsion capability of the SLS, which has expanded 

beyond a typical launch vehicle design. Of particular concern for SLS are the predicted high 

acoustic levels occurring at low frequencies internal to the fairing. 

Expendable launch vehicle (ELV) fairings typically utilize acoustic treatments (e.g., foam 

blankets, fiberglass blankets, and passive Helmholtz resonator devices) to reduce the acoustic 

energy that transmits through the fairing wall and into the payload region. The typical acoustic 

blanket treatments applied to launch vehicle fairings are effective in reducing the transmission of 

noise in the 400 Hz and higher frequency range. Something beyond the traditional and current 

state-of-the-art acoustic reduction methodologies will be required for SLS noise reduction, 

especially at lower frequencies (<400 Hz). 

A similar situation occurred in the 1990’s for the Cassini mission to Saturn, which required 

specialized acoustic treatments to address a radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG) 

vibration concern at 250 and 315 Hz. From an extensive and successful acoustic blanket 

development program performed for the Titan IV/Cassini mission, NASA accumulated a wealth 

of knowledge and acoustic characterization data on fiberglass blankets [refs. 5–7]. The 

Titan IV/Cassini Program evaluated 19 different fiberglass configurations of varying blanket 

thicknesses, blanket densities, and internal mass barriers with varying placement locations and 

densities, for a series of flat panel acoustic testing at the RAL in March and April 1994. The 

data were used to select the two most promising new blanket designs for full-scale acoustic 

testing at the Lockheed-Martin (Denver) reverberant acoustic chamber in January and 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

11 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

February 1995. As a result, a new fiberglass barrier blanket, denoted “V5,” was chosen for 

implementation on the Titan IV/Cassini mission and flew in October 1997. This V5 fiberglass 

barrier blanket successfully reduced the acoustic environment to the Cassini spacecraft as 

needed [ref. 8]. 

Given the trend in industry today to use ML foam, it was deemed prudent to assemble a database 

of acoustic performance test data for ML foam, similar (albeit smaller) to what was achieved for 

the fiberglass blankets for the Titan IV/Cassini mission. The initial step for obtaining this 

database was the NEMFAT series of acoustic tests. 

The technical objective of this NESC-funded NEMFAT task was to obtain relevant acoustic test 

data characterizing the acoustic performance of ML foam, both normal and enhanced. The data 

could then be used as a starting point for future acoustic test programs and to help baseline 

predictions for potential use of these systems. 

 7.0 Data Analysis 

The NEMFAT test program consisted of three absorption tests and six TL tests performed at 

RAL on July 9–10, 2013. The Vibro-Acoustics (VA One) analysis software, sold by the ESI 

Group, was used by the GRC engineers to make pretest TL predictions. A summary of the 

weights and dimensions of the various test configurations as measured at RAL is given in 

Table 7.0-1. 

The complete RAL test reports are provided in Appendices C and D for the absorption and the 

TL testing, respectively. RAL is accredited to perform sound absorption coefficient 

measurements and sound TL measurements for the one-third octave bands in the frequency range 

of 100 to 5,000 Hz. Additional unofficial representative test data are provided as a service to 

their customers at several extra one-third octave band frequencies, both at lower (40–80 Hz) and 

higher (6,300–10,000 Hz) frequencies than the ASTM standard frequencies. 

 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

12 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Table 7.0-1. Weight Summary of Test Configurations 

RAL Test 

Report # 

Test Configuration 

Description 

Panel 

Weight, 

lb 

Treatment 

Weight, 

lb 

Total 

Weight, 

lb 

Overall 

Dimensions, in. 

(W × H × T) 

Absorption 

Test 

A13-173 2-in. ML foam No 

panel 6.0 6.0 96 × 96 × 2 

A13-174 2-in. ML foam with 

voids 

No 

panel 6.0 6.0 96 × 96 × 2 

A13-175 4-in. ML foam No 

panel 12.0 12.00 96 × 96 × 4 

TL Test 

TL13-139 FRF panel 39.5 No treatment 39.5 47.75 × 95.75 

× 1.08 

TL13-140 FRF panel with 4-in. 

ML foam 39.5 6.0 45.5 47.75 × 95.75 × 5.08 

TL13-141 FRF panel with 4-in. 

ML foam with voids 39.5 6.0 45.5 47.75 × 95.75 × 5.08 

TL13-142 

FRF panel with 4-in. 

ML foam with mass 

inclusions (in voids) 

39.5 

7.8 

with mass 

inclusions 

47.3 47.75 × 95.75 

× 5.08 

TL13-143 

FRF panel with 4-in. 

ML foam with mass 

barrier 

39.5 

20.0 

with mass 

barrier 

59.5 47.75 × 95.75 

× 5.08 

TL13-144 

FRF panel with 8-in. 

ML UL foam and ML 

foam combination 

with mass barrier 

39.5 

24.8 

with mass 

barrier 

64.3 47.75 × 95.75 

× 8.08 

The following sections describe the testing and data analysis performed for NEMFAT. 

7.1 Absorption Testing 

The choices for the absorption test configurations were based on the test concepts stated in the 

original proposal, as well as material limitations. For absorption testing, ATSM C423 

recommends that the area of the test specimen be at least 60 ft2

 and recommends 72 ft2. Since 

the foam sheets were each 4 ft × 8 ft (32 ft2

), an area of 64 ft2 was achievable by placing two 

foam sheets next to each other. However, lack of sufficient physical materials prevented this 

from being possible in all cases; for example, a total of only 32 ft2

 was available for the ML UL 

foam, the ML foam with a mass barrier, and for the FRF base panel. Therefore, no absorption 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

13 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

testing could be performed for these items. What was achievable and actually tested were the 

following three foam configurations, as illustrated in Figure 7.1-1. 

x A13-173 – 2-in. ML foam 

x A13-174 – 2-in. ML foam with voids 

x A13-175 – 4-in. ML foam 

Figure 7.1-1. Cross-sectional Views of NEMFAT Absorption Test Configurations 

This testing allowed an analysis of the effect of thickness on absorption (i.e., a comparison of 

2-in. versus 4-in.-thick ML foam), and also allowed a comparison of ML foam with and without 

the voids. A typical absorption test setup at RAL is shown in Figure 7.1-2. The actual 

absorption test reports from RAL are provided in Appendix C. 

In Figure 7.1-3, a plot of the measured absorption coefficient (Sabine absorption) is shown 

versus frequency for the three configurations tested. The thicker foam (4 in.; A13-175) is a 

much more effective absorber at lower frequencies compared with the thinner foam 

(2 in.; A13-173). This trend is expected from theory and also agrees with previous test data 

obtained from the Cassini fiberglass blanket testing. Note that the Sabine absorption coefficient 

can exceed a value of 1.0 due to edge diffraction effects and to the Sabine formulation 

itself [ref. 9]. 

An enhancement was made to two of the gray ML foam sheets. The enhancement was to 

introduce 18 voids (or holes), each with a 0.25-in. diameter, through the foam thickness 

direction, in a random pattern for each sheet. It can also be seen in Figure 7.1-3 that the presence 

of the voids in the ML foam (A13-174) had no significant effect on the absorption of the ML 

foam compared with the unaltered ML foam (A13-173) of the same thickness. Further study is 

needed to reach any firm conclusion since only one enhanced void variation was tested. 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

14 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Figure 7.1-2. RAL’s Absorption Test Setup 

(4-in.-thick ML foam, ASTM-C423 Reverberation Room Method)

Figure 7.1-3. NEMFAT Absorption Test Results 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

15 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

The 2-in. (A13-173) and 4-in. (A13-175) thick ML foam absorption data are compared in 

Figure 7.1-4 with the absorption data from the 3-in.-thick fiberglass “baseline” blanket (from the 

1994 Titan IV/Cassini testing; A94-72). From this comparison, it appears that the ML foam has 

a higher peak magnitude of absorption relative to the fiberglass blanket and that the ML foam 

has a much greater frequency range of effectiveness relative to the fiberglass. However, note 

that the ML foam tests had no cover sheet material for the NEMFAT testing, whereas the 

fiberglass blanket was encased in a Mylar bag, which could be the cause of the decline in 

absorption after reaching the peak absorption value. Further testing of ML foam with a cover 

sheet is required to determine those effects. 

Figure 7.1-4. Comparison of Absorption Coefficients for Melamine Foam versus Fiberglass 

(Note: the tested ML foam treatments did not have cover sheets) 

7.2 Transmission Loss Testing 

The choice for the TL test configurations was based first on the test concepts stated in the 

original proposal and secondly on obtaining additional relevant knowledge. Since the RAL test 

specimen window between the source and receiver rooms was 8 ft × 4 ft, only one foam sheet of 

that size was needed for testing. This allowed TL testing of both the ML foam with the mass 

barrier, and a complex, thicker buildup of materials combining the ML UL foam, the ML foam, 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

16 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

and the ML foam with the barrier. The six TL tests performed, as shown in Figure 7.2-1, were as 

follows: 

x TL13-139 – FRF panel 

x TL13-140 – FRF panel with 4-in. ML foam 

x TL13-141 – FRF panel with 4-in. ML foam with voids 

x TL13-142 – FRF panel with 4-in. ML foam with mass inclusions (in voids) 

x TL13-143 – FRF panel with 4-in. ML foam with a mass barrier 

x TL13-144 – FRF panel with 8-in. total foam thickness: ML UL foam (2 in.) and 

ML foam (6 in.) combination with a mass barrier 

Figure 7.2-1. Cross-sectional Views of NEMFAT TL Test Configurations 

These test configurations allowed for multiple acoustic TL performance comparisons, including 

(a) bare panel versus treated panel, (b) normal ML foam versus enhanced (i.e., voids and mass 

inclusions) ML foam, (c) the effect of the Sonic 5666 mass barrier (<0.06 in. thickness), and 

(d) the effect of complex buildup of materials. 

A typical TL test setup at RAL is shown in Figure 7.2-2. The actual TL test reports from RAL 

are provided in Appendix D. 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

17 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Figure 7.2-2. RAL’s TL Test Setup for TL13-142 

(ASTM E-90 Airborne Sound TL for Building Partitions and Elements Method) 

The TL plots for the six NEMFAT test configurations are shown in Figure 7.2-3. The bare 

untreated FRF panel (TL13-139), with a weight of 39.5 lb, provides a nominal TL reduction, 

reaching a peak of 28 decibels (dB) at 4,000 Hz (and at 3,150 Hz). The addition of 4 in. of ML 

foam (by using two 2-in. ML foam sheets) to the FRF panel (a total weight of 45.5 lb for panel 

and treatment) substantially increases the TL (TL13-140), reaching 51 dB, respectively, 

at 4,000 Hz. This 23-dB improvement in TL at 4,000 Hz is significantly greater than the 

1–2 dB that could be attributed to the TL increase due only to the mass law. 

 

Left, Transmission Loss Receiver Room 

(4-in. ML foam with mass inclusions 

shown in test window) 

Right, Transmission Loss Source Room 

(FRF panel shown in test window) 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

18 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Figure 7.2-3. NEMFAT TL Test Results 

Enhancements were made to two of the gray ML foam sheets. The enhancement was to 

introduce 18 voids (or holes), each with a 0.25-in. diameter, through the foam thickness 

direction, in a random pattern for each sheet. The second enhancement was to later fill these 

voids with serrated hex flange bolts representing mass inclusions. The added weight of the 36 

bolts was 1.8 lb. 

There was no measured improvement (or worsening) in the TL due to the voids and the mass 

inclusion enhancements. This is shown by the overlapping of the TL data measurements for the 

tests of the 4-in. ML foam (TL13-140), the 4-in. ML foam with voids (TL13-141), and the 

4-in. ML foam with mass inclusions (TL13-142) configurations. This observation was 

disappointing in that both the literature [refs. 1 and 2] and the pretest VA One TL analysis with 

voids enhancement predicted an observable increase in TL for the enhanced ML foam. Further 

efforts are necessary to understand the controlling parameters to physically realize this possible 

improvement. The NEMFAT task funding did not allow for testing of multiple enhancements 

with varying parameters, such as void size and number of voids. 

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

10 100 1000 10000

Transmission Loss (dB)

Frequency (Hz)

TL13-139 (Bare Panel) TL13-140 (4-in.)

TL13-141 (4-in. with voids) TL13-142 (4-in. with masses inserted into voids)

TL13-143 (4-in. with barrier) TL13-144 (8-in. with barrier)
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

19 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

The next TL test (TL13-143) added a mass barrier to 4 in. of ML foam (total weight of 59.5 lb, 

including both panel and treatment). This configuration was a 2-in. ML foam sheet layered with 

another 2-in. ML foam sheet with the mass barrier in its center, as shown in Figure 7.2-4. 

Compared with the normal 4-in. ML foam (TL13-140), the foam/mass barrier configuration was 

significantly better in resisting sound transmission. For example, at 4,000 Hz the TL was 

61 dB, a 10-dB improvement over the same ML foam thickness without the mass barrier, and an 

improvement of 33 dB over the bare FRF panel. 

Figure 7.2-4. 2-in.-thick ML Foam Sheet with Mass Barrier at its Center 

With one remaining TL test to be performed, it was decided to test a complex foam treatment 

configuration (TL13-144). This configuration started with the previously described 4-in. ML 

foam sheet with mass barrier configuration and then added a 2-in.-thick sheet of ML UL foam 

and a 2-in.-thick sheet of ML foam. This resulted in an 8-in.-thick treatment (with a total weight 

of 64.3 lb for both the panel and the treatment), as shown in Figure 7.2-5. Not surprisingly, this 

treatment provided the best TL of the NEMFAT treatment configurations tested. At 4,000 Hz, 

the TL was 67 dB, a 6-dB improvement over the 4-in. with the mass barrier treatment 

(TL13-143) and a 39-dB improvement over the bare FRF panel (TL13-139). 

As can be seen in Figure 7.2-3, the improvements in TL for each of the foam treatments are most 

evident above 200 Hz. Below 100 Hz, the measured TL test data seemed to converge for all 

configurations tested. 

Mass barrier 

2-in. thick ML foam 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

20 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Figure 7.2-5. 8-in.-thick Combination Foam Treatment (TL13-144) 

(top to bottom layers: FRF panel, 2-in. ML foam, 2-in. ML foam with 

center mass barrier, 2-in. ML UL foam, 2-in. ML foam) 

In Figure 7.2-6, a comparison is shown of pretest analytical predictions of TL for (a) 4-in. ML 

foam with mass barrier and (b) the 8-in. complex foam treatment with the associated RAL TL 

test data (TL13-143 and TL13-144, respectively). For both cases, the VA One prediction is quite 

good up to 1,000 Hz. Above this frequency, the predicted TL continues to increase, whereas the 

measured TL data tend to plateau. Understanding why the analysis does not predict better and 

improving the comparison above 1,000 Hz will be areas of further study. 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

21 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Figure 7.2-6. TL Comparison of RAL Test Data and VA One Pretest Predictions 

(top: 4-in. ML foam with mass barrier (TL13-143); 

bottom: 8-in. combination foam treatment (TL13-144)) 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

22 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

8.0 Findings, Observations, and NESC Recommendations 

8.1 Findings 

The following findings were identified: 

Absorption 

F-1. The acoustic absorption of ML foam (without a cover sheet) is superior relative to the 

fiberglass (with a cover sheet) absorption because it offers a higher absorption coefficient 

over a wider frequency range. 

F-2. The effective frequency range for absorption of ML foam (without a cover sheet) is 

shifted to lower frequencies by increasing the thickness of ML foam. 

F-3. The peak magnitude absorption value for ML foam (without a cover sheet) is greater than 

the Titan IV fiberglass blanket (with a cover sheet). 

F-4. The absorption of ML foam (without a cover sheet) did not fall off above 300 Hz, unlike 

the absorption of the Titan IV fiberglass blanket (with a cover sheet). 

F-5. The enhancements (i.e., addition of voids) to the ML foam that were tested did not 

improve or worsen the absorption characteristics of the ML foam. 

Transmission Loss 

F-6. The TL for the ML foam on the panel was significantly greater than the TL of the bare 

panel. 

F-7. The addition of a mass barrier to the ML foam treatment further increased the TL. 

F-8. The TL for a thicker ML foam treatment with a mass barrier was greater than the TL for 

thinner ML foam with the same mass barrier. 

F-9. Of the six configurations tested for TL, the best TL performance was for the combination 

8-in. foam treatment (6-in.-thick ML foam and 2-in.-thick ML UL foam combined with a 

mass barrier). 

F-10. The pretest VA One analytical predictions for TL matched well with test data up to 

1,000 Hz; however, the analytical predictions diverge and overpredict TL above 

1,000 Hz. 

F-11. The enhancements (i.e., the addition of voids and the addition of mass inclusions) to the 

ML foam test configurations did not improve or worsen the TL characteristics. 

8.2 Observations 

The following observations were noted:

O-1. The RAL test facility is fully capable to properly perform the required testing per the 

ASTM standards (ASTM C423 for absorption and ASTM E90 for TL). 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

23 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

O-2. In order to “test like you fly,” it was necessary to reverse the source and receiver rooms at 

RAL from their normal room configuration. This was done without any technical impact. 

O-3. The ML foam acoustic treatments tested were lighter in weight than traditional acoustic 

fiberglass blankets. 

O-4. The mass barriers tested with the ML foam acoustic treatments were similar in weight to 

mass barriers utilized for acoustic fiberglass barrier blankets. 

O-5. The inability to accurately model, in VA One, the TL beyond 1,000 Hz is an area of 

concern for modeling of the composite FRF panel with foam acoustic treatments. 

O-6. Acoustic testing of a representative panel with acoustic treatments can be useful in 

identifying leading candidates of acoustic treatments. 

8.3 NESC Recommendations 

The following NESC recommendations are directed to the SLS Payload Fairing project: 

R-1. Consider utilization of ML foam in the development of acoustic attenuation systems for 

the SLS Payload Fairing project due to the ML foam’s improved acoustic performance 

and lighter mass relative to fiberglass blankets. (F-1, F-2, F-3, F-6, O-3)

R-2. Conduct a more comprehensive acoustic test program, to include investigation of the 

effects of cover sheets and attachment methods, thickness, density, mass barrier location 

and density, voids and mass inclusions, standoffs, and percent blanket coverage. 

(F-4, F-5, F-7, F-8, F-9, F-11)

R-3. Evaluate the acoustic characteristics of the DuPontTM LoWaveTM acoustic blanket. 

(F-5, F-11)

R-4. Investigate the VA One modeling concerns of composite panels with foam acoustic 

treatments for TL predictions greater than 1,000 Hz. (F-10, O-5)

R-5. Conduct full-scale cylindrical acoustic testing of representative SLS Payload Fairing 

configurations using the best acoustic treatment candidate(s) from the NEMFAT and 

from future panel testing. Panel test configurations do not account for the cylinder’s 

structural stiffness or its acoustic cavity. (F-1, F-6, O-3, O-6)

R-6. Investigate the potential structural issues or other concerns that need to be resolved 

before implementing proposed thicker and/or heavier acoustic treatments for the SLS 

Payload Fairing project. (F-9, O-6)

9.0 Alternate Viewpoint 

There were no alternate viewpoints identified during the course of this assessment by the NESC 

team or the NRB quorum. 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

24 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

10.0 Other Deliverables 

The test data, models, and report generated from this NEMFAT work were electronically 

transferred to the GRC SLS Payload Fairing project in support of future SLS Payload Fairing 

acoustic attenuation system designs and analyses. 

11.0 Lessons Learned 

No applicable lessons learned were identified for entry into the NASA Lessons Learned 

Information System (LLIS) as a result of this assessment. 

12.0 Recommendations for NASA Standards and Specifications 

No recommendations for NASA standards and specifications were identified as a result of this 

assessment. 

13.0 Definition of Terms 

Absorption The loss of acoustical energy by a sound wave while traveling through a 

fluid or solid medium. 

Absorption The dimensionless ratio of sound energy absorbed by a given surface 

Coefficient to that incident upon the surface, often denoted as α.

Barrier A material inserted internally in an acoustic treatment whose purpose is to 

block the direct path of sound energy. 

Corrective Actions Changes to design processes, work instructions, workmanship practices, 

training, inspections, tests, procedures, specifications, drawings, tools, 

equipment, facilities, resources, or material that result in preventing, 

minimizing, or limiting the potential for recurrence of a problem. 

Decibel Dimensionless unit (abbreviated as dB) that expresses the ratio of two 

powers, such as acoustical power. The number of decibels is 10 times the 

logarithm to the base 10 of the power ratio. 

Finding A relevant factual conclusion and/or issue that is within the assessment 

scope and that the team has rigorously based on data from their 

independent analyses, tests, inspections, and/or reviews of technical 

documentation. 

Hertz Unit of frequency, defined as number of cycles per second of a periodic 

waveform (abbreviated as Hz). 

Lessons Learned Knowledge, understanding, or conclusive insight gained by experience 

that may benefit other current or future NASA programs and projects. 

The experience may be positive, as in a successful test or mission, or 

negative, as in a mishap or failure. 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

25 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Mass Law An approximate relationship that describes the sound TL of a solid panel 

in terms of mass density and frequency. For normal incidence, the mass 

law predicts a 6-dB increase in TL for every doubling of the panel weight 

(or for every doubling of frequency) up to a plateau frequency. 

Observation A noteworthy fact, issue, and/or risk, which may not be directly within the 

assessment scope, but could generate a separate issue or concern if not 

addressed. Alternatively, an observation can be a positive 

acknowledgement of a Center/Program/Project/Organization’s operational 

structure, tools, and/or support provided. 

One-Third Frequency band where the ratio of the frequency of the upper band limit to 

Octave Band the frequency of the lower band limit is 21/3 (1.26). There are three 

(OTOB) OTOBs in one octave band. 

Panel The baseline or core material wall on which further acoustic treatments 

may be mounted. The panel may represent the payload fairing wall 

structure for example. 

Problem The subject of the independent technical assessment. 

Proximate Cause The event(s) that occurred, including any condition(s) that existed 

immediately before the undesired outcome, directly resulted in its 

occurrence and, if eliminated or modified, would have prevented the 

undesired outcome. 

Recommendation A proposed measurable stakeholder action directly supported by specific 

Finding(s) and/or Observation(s) that will correct or mitigate an identified 

issue or risk. 

Reverberation Room A room designed so that the sound field closely approximates a diffuse 

sound field. Typically, the room’s surfaces are highly reflective, resulting 

in a long reverberation time. 

Root Cause One of multiple factors (events, conditions, or organizational factors) that 

contributed to or created the proximate cause and subsequent undesired 

outcome and, if eliminated or modified, would have prevented the 

undesired outcome. Typically, multiple root causes contribute to an 

undesired outcome. 

 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

26 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Sound Pressure Level The logarithmic ratio, abbreviated as SPL and expressed in dB, of the 

mean square sound pressure (p) to the reference mean square pressure 

(pref). By convention, the reference pressure (pref) is often selected as the 

threshold of hearing, or 20 μ Pascals (rms). 

ܵܲܮ ൌ ͳͲ ଵ଴ ൬ ௣

௣ೝ೐೑൰

ଶ

ൌ ʹͲ ଵ଴ ൬ ௣

௣ೝ೐೑൰

Transmission Loss The logarithmic ratio, abbreviated as TL and expressed in decibels, of the 

sound power incident (Wi) on the surface of a partition to the sound power 

transmitted (WT) on the other side. 

ܶܮ ൌ ͳͲ ଵ଴ ቀ

ௐ೔

ௐ೅

ቁ

VA One Vibro-acoustics modeling and analysis software sold by ESI Group. 

14.0 Acronym List 

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials 

dB decibel 

ELV Expendable Launch Vehicle 

FRF Fiber Reinforced Foam 

FTE Full Time Equivalent 

GRC Glenn Research Center 

Hz Hertz (unit of frequency) 

JSC Johnson Space Center 

KSC Kennedy Space Center 

LaRC Langley Research Center 

ML Melamine (foam) 

MSFC Marshall Space Flight Center 

NEMFAT NESC Enhanced Melamine Foam Acoustic Testing 

NG Northrop Grumman Corporation 

NESC NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

OTOB One-Third Octave Band 

RAL Riverbank Acoustical Laboratories 

RTG Radioisotope Thermoelectric Generators 

SGT Stinger Ghaffarian Technologies, Inc. 

SLS Space Launch System 

SPL Sound Pressure Level 

TL Transmission Loss 

UL Ultralight (melamine foam) 

VA One Vibro-Acoustics One 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

27 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

15.0 References 

1. Gardner, B., Burkewitz, B., Bremner, P., Fuller, C., and Atalla, N., “Advanced Acoustic 

Blanket Concepts for Payload Fairings,” Spacecraft and Launch Vehicle Dynamic 

Environments Workshop, June 2002. 

2. Kidner, M., Fuller, C., and Gardner, B., “Increase in Transmission Loss of Single Panels by 

Addition of Mass Inclusions to a Poro-elastic Layer: Experimental Investigation,” March 

2005. 

3. American Society for Testing and Materials, “Standard Test Method for Sound Absorption 

and Sound Absorption Coefficients by the Reverberation Room Method,” ASTM C423-09a, 

October 15, 2009. 

4. American Society for Testing and Materials, “Standard Test Method for Laboratory 

Measurement of Airborne Sound Transmission Loss of Building Partitions and Elements,”

ASTM E90-09, July 1, 2009. 

5. Hughes, W. O. and McNelis, A. M., “Cassini/Titan IV Acoustic Blanket Development and 

Testing,” NASA-TM-107266, July 1996. 

6. Hughes, W. O. and McNelis, A. M., “Acoustic Testing of the Cassini Spacecraft and Titan 

IV Payload Fairing, Part 1 – Introduction and Test Configuration,” NASA-TM-107474, July 

1997. 

7. Hughes, W. O. and McNelis, A. M., “Acoustic Testing of the Cassini Spacecraft and Titan 

IV Payload Fairing, Part 1 – Results,” NASA-TM-107475, July 1997. 

8. Hughes, W. O., McNelis, A. M., and Himelblau, H., “Investigation of Acoustic Fields for the 

Cassini Spacecraft: Reverberant Versus Launch Environments,” NASA-TM-2000-209387, 

September 2000. 

9. Cox, T. J. and D’Antonio, P., Acoustic Absorbers and Diffusers, Taylor & Francis, New 

York, 2004. 

16.0 Appendices 

Appendix A. Proposal for NESC Discipline Enhancing Work 

Appendix B. Expenditure Cost Breakdown 

Appendix C. RAL Absorption Test Reports 

Appendix D. RAL TL Test Reports 

 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

28 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Appendix A. Proposal for NESC Discipline Enhancing Work 

Title: Acoustic Test of an Enhanced Melamine Foam Acoustic Treatment

POC: Anne M. McNelis/NASA GRC DEV/216-433-8880/ Anne.M.McNelis@nasa.gov 

William Hughes/NASA GRC DEV/216-433-2597/William.O.Hughes@nasa.gov 

Mark E. McNelis/NASA GRC DEV/216-433-8395/ Mark.E.McNelis@nasa.gov 

Background: The Space Launch System (SLS) vehicle has an unprecedented high 

external acoustic liftoff level. This in turn produces an internal fairing acoustic noise 

level detrimental to payload development especially in the 20 Hz – 400 Hz frequency 

range. Typically an acoustic blanket without special design consideration is not 

effective in this lower frequency range. 

When compared to the typical Expendable Launch Vehicle (ELV) internal overall sound 

pressure level, the SLS fairing internal acoustic level may be as much as 10 dB higher. 

This acoustic problem has been studied for various vehicle fairing acoustic analyses. 

Previously flown flight blankets (barrier/fiberglass design acoustic blankets used for the 

Titan IV/Cassini mission) have been analytically used to lower the predicted internal 

noise level. 

A newly defined acoustic treatment design, with enhanced melamine foam, has recently 

been analyzed using the VA ONE acoustic software. Preliminary assessment of this 

work shows potential for increased acoustic noise reduction in the 20 Hz – 400 Hz 

frequency range compared with traditional acoustic blanket designs. Furthermore this 

melamine foam is simple to implement, and is estimated to be 1/3 of the weight and 1⁄2 

the cost of the Titan IV/Cassini acoustic blanket. 

Task Description: It is proposed that this enhanced melamine foam acoustic treatment 

design be analytically optimized, and assembled and tested at a transmission loss (TL) 

and absorption acoustic facility to determine its noise lowering benefits for possible use 

in the SLS fairing. 

The (approximate 4 ft x 8 ft) melamine foam treatments could be assembled at the 

NASA Glenn Research Center (GRC) with purchased materials. Pretest analysis, 

testing and post-test correlation would be performed and documented. Preferably an 

SLS Fairing Project-provided composite panel would be utilized as the baseline for this 

testing, with the backup plan being a previously tested composite panel from GRC. It is 

proposed that three (3) configurations be tested for both TL and absorption to assess 

the performance of the acoustic treatment. These three configurations are bare panel 

(no treatment), melamine foam with panel, and enhanced melamine foam with panel. 

The TL and absorption data acquired will provide data verifying the acoustic 

performance of the acoustic treatments, and can be compared with similar data from 

traditional and enhanced (Titan IV/Cassini) acoustic blankets. This data would also 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

29 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

provide parameters for acoustic model correlation thereby advancing the SLS Fairing’s 

structural acoustic optimization. 

It is recommended that testing be performed at an accredited two-reverberant-room 

sound facility capable of performing both ASTM E-90 (transmission loss) and ASTMC423 (absorption) testing. GRC has had good acoustic test experiences with both the 

Riverbank Acoustical Laboratories (Geneva, IL) and Owens Corning’s Acoustic 

Laboratory (Granville, OH). 

Deliverables: An official NASA report will be written that documents the testing 

performed, and the resulting TL and absorption test data from the three test panel 

configurations. This report will also contain the VA ONE acoustic models for the tested 

panels and the comparison of the VA ONE predictions with the panel test data. A 

summary of the highlights of this work could also be presented at a NESC webinar (or 

meeting if travel costs are provided). 

Required Resources: In order to analyze, test and document the results of the 

performance of the melamine foam acoustic treatments the following resources are 

required: 

0.25 FTE: Includes pretest analysis, optimization of enhanced melamine foam 

blanket treatment, procurement and assembly of test hardware, support of test, 

post–test correlation, and report documentation. 

$15K of Procurement Costs: Includes test costs ($7.5K), material costs ($2.5K), 

shipping ($1K), travel ($2.5 K), miscellaneous/material assembly ($1.5K). 

 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

30 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Appendix B. Expenditure Cost Breakdown 

Original cost budget = $15,000.00 

Expenditures = $14,922.57 

(99.5% of budget was spent) 

Materials $ 

Melamine Foam 1886.06 

Miscellaneous 

Materials 

159.86 

LoWaveTM

Blankets 

(purchased after 

NEMFAT testing) 

2440.00 

Materials Total 4,485.92 

Testing 

Test Services 7655.00 

Material 

Shipment to/from 

test site 

1070.00 

Travel Expenses 1391.75 

Use of 

Government Car 

(mileage) 

319.90 

Testing Total 10,436.65 

Total 14,922.57 

 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

31 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Appendix C. RAL Absorption Test Reports 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

32 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

33 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

34 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

35 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

36 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

37 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

38 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

39 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

40 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

41 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

42 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

43 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

44 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

45 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

46 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

47 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

48 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

49 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

50 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

51 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

52 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

53 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

54 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

55 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 

Appendix D. RAL TL Test Reports 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

56 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

57 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

58 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

59 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

60 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

61 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

62 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

63 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

64 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

65 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

66 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

67 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

68 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

69 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

70 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

71 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

72 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

73 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

74 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

75 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

76 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

77 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

78 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

79 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

80 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

81 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

82 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

83 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

84 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

85 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

86 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

87 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

88 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

89 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

90 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

91 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

92 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

93 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

94 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

95 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

96 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
NASA Engineering and Safety Center 

Technical Assessment Report

Document #: 

NESC-RP13-00919 

Version: 

1.0 

Title:

NESC Enhanced ML Foam Acoustic Test 

Page #: 

97 of 97

NESC Request No.: TI-13-00919 
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved

OMB No. 0704-0188

2. REPORT TYPE 

Technical Memorandum

 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE

NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) Enhanced Melamine (ML) 

Foam Acoustic Test (NEMFAT)

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

 6. AUTHOR(S)

McNelis, Anne M.; Hughes, William O.; McNelis, Mark E.

 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

NASA Langley Research Center

Hampton, VA 23681-2199

 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES)

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

Washington, DC 20546-0001

 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

 REPORT NUMBER

L-20372 NESC-RP-13-00919

10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S)

NASA

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

12. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT

Unclassified - Unlimited

Subject Category 39 Structural Mechanics

Availability: NASA CASI (443) 757-5802

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON

STI Help Desk (email: help@sti.nasa.gov)

14. ABSTRACT

The NASA Engineering and Safety Center (NESC) funded a proposal to achieve initial basic acoustic characterization of ML 

(melamine) foam, which could serve as a starting point for a future, more comprehensive acoustic test program for ML foam. 

A project plan was developed and implemented to obtain acoustic test data for both normal and enhanced ML foam. This 

project became known as the NESC Enhanced Melamine Foam Acoustic Test (NEMFAT). This document contains the 

outcome of the NEMFAT project.

15. SUBJECT TERMS

NESC Enhanced Melamine Foam Acoustic Test; NASA Engineering and Safety Center; Fiber Reinforced Foam; Transmission 

Loss

18. NUMBER

 OF 

 PAGES

102

19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code)

(443) 757-5802

a. REPORT

U

c. THIS PAGE

U

b. ABSTRACT

U

17. LIMITATION OF 

 ABSTRACT

UU

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)

3. DATES COVERED (From - To)

December 2012 - December 2013

5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

5d. PROJECT NUMBER

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

869021.03.07.01.11

11. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S REPORT

 NUMBER(S)

NASA/TM-2014-218162

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF:

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, 

gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this 

collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and 

Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person 

shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY)

01- 02 - 2014