The result
A residential block was planning acoustic upgrades, but the client wanted measured evidence — not guesswork.
ATSPACE carried out pre‑improvement sound insulation testing to set a clear baseline for airborne and impact sound, identify the weakest paths, and define realistic upgrade targets before spending money.
The result was a targeted and cost‑efficient upgrade plan focused on the floor build‑ups and flanking routes that were actually causing complaints, rather than broad, expensive strip‑out across all flats.
Project snapshot
Service: Pre‑improvement sound insulation testing
Client: Managing agent + refurbishment contractor
Site: Rowan Court, 22 Millbank Road, Reading RG2 0EW
Building type: 3‑storey residential block, 24 flats
Construction: Concrete slabs, mixed floor finishes, suspended ceilings in some units
Programme stage: Pre‑upgrade baseline + scope setting
Compliance driver: Part E upgrade intent + resident comfort goals
ATSPACE delivery: Airborne + impact testing, build‑up inspection, diagnosis of weak points, upgrade‑target recommendations, reporting for contractor scope
Why baseline sound testing was needed
The client had a common retrofit problem:
Everyone had an opinion — no one had measured evidence.
Baseline testing answered three critical questions:
- What is the actual performance today?
- Is the dominant issue airborne noise, impact noise, or both?
- Where is the weakest path that should be fixed first?
Without baseline data, acoustic upgrades become a gamble — and expensive mistakes are common.
What pre‑improvement sound insulation testing measures
ATSPACE measured the sound transmission before any upgrade works, covering:
Airborne sound insulation
Noise transmitted through structure from speech, TV, music, normal living.
Reported as DnT,w + spectrum adjustment.
Impact sound insulation
Footfall, dropped items, hard flooring noise.
Reported as L’nT,w.
The value of baseline testing is that it identifies:
- whether the floor structure is the weak point
- whether flanking routes are amplifying noise
- whether finishes (such as hard flooring) are the main culprit
What was happening in this block
Residents were experiencing different issues, but a pattern emerged:
- footfall in bedrooms + living rooms
- chair scrape noise travelling clearly
- occasional airborne speech transfer
- worse results in certain vertical stacks
This strongly suggested impact noise dominance, with flanking via services and ceiling voids worsening the problem.
What ATSPACE did
Step 1: Select the right test locations
We mapped complaints by stack and selected representative flat‑pairs — not random locations — to maximise diagnostic value.
Step 2: Baseline airborne + impact testing
We tested selected dwellings and documented:
- floor finish details
- ceiling build‑ups
- any relevant construction differences
Step 3: Walkthrough inspections linked to results
We inspected the structure to confirm why certain flats performed worse, checking:
- hard flooring + underlay type
- perimeter detailing
- ceiling voids, downlighters, access panels
- service penetrations and boxing
- corridor/party wall junctions
- suspended ceiling condition (where present)
Step 4: Identify dominant weak paths + set upgrade targets
We separated general background transmission from the primary failure routes and issued practical upgrade targets based on measured data.
The baseline results and what they meant
The results were clear:
- Airborne performance: varied by stack but generally near acceptable comfort
- Impact performance: consistently weak in units with hard flooring + basic ceiling build‑ups
This proved the block’s real issue:
- impact sound through floor finishes, not airborne sound
- flanking routes through ceiling penetrations + services
This prevented the client from wasting money on airborne‑focused upgrades that wouldn’t fix the complaints.
The upgrade plan ATSPACE recommended
A staged plan focused on impact sound first, then flanking.
Priority measures
- improved floor‑finish strategy using correct acoustic underlay
- targeted ceiling close‑out in worst stacks
- sealing flanking routes (downlighters, services, boxing)
- eliminating connected void pathways
Secondary measures
- ceiling upgrades only where floor‑finish improvements wouldn’t be enough
- standardised detailing across flats to prevent repeat issues
The plan was tailored for occupied buildings, with disruption kept minimal.
Outcomes
The client gained:
- clear baseline results for budget justification
- targeted upgrade scope focusing on the real weak points
- realistic improvement targets for contractors
- reduced risk of ineffective spend
- a repeatable process for verifying improvements after works
Common mistakes this project avoided
- starting upgrades without measuring baseline performance
- assuming airborne noise was the issue when impact noise dominated
- ignoring flanking through services/ceilings
- applying a blanket solution to all flats
- spending money on strip‑out without evidence
CTA
If you are planning acoustic upgrades and want to know what will actually work, ATSPACE pre‑improvement sound insulation testing gives you:
- a measured baseline
- clear weak‑path diagnosis
- a realistic upgrade target
- evidence that supports decision‑making
Ask for:
- baseline airborne + impact sound testing
- diagnosis of weak floors + flanking routes
- upgrade‑target setting for Part E improvement projects
- clear reporting for contractor scope + client approvals
Frequently asked questions
Why test before upgrades?
To avoid wasting money — baseline testing reveals whether airborne or impact noise is the real issue.
Do you test both airborne and impact?
Yes. Both must be understood to design the correct upgrade scope.
Can you set realistic improvement targets?
Yes — based on construction type, budget, and measured performance.
Will testing reduce resident complaints?
Testing itself doesn’t fix the problem — but it ensures upgrades target the real cause, which does reduce complaints after works.
