<?xml version="1.0"?>
<metadata xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"><dc:title>Towards bridging the gap between vibration serviceability and acoustics of lightweight floors</dc:title><dc:creator>Kurent,	Blaž	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Esposito,	Antonio	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Schoenwald,	Stefan	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:creator>Pavic,	Aleksandar	(Avtor)
	</dc:creator><dc:subject>lightweight floors</dc:subject><dc:subject>floor vibration</dc:subject><dc:subject>vibration serviceability</dc:subject><dc:subject>acoustic performanceimpact sound insulationmitigation strategiesremedial measureshuman-induced vibrationswalking excitationsound transmission lossresonance regionlow-frequency regionsound reduction indexdecouplingresilient interlayersprefabricated floors</dc:subject><dc:description>As modern structures tend to become more lightweight, acoustics and vibration serviceability increasingly govern the design of the floors. A large percentage of the mass of such a structure is normally attributed to solving vibroacoustic problems. Even though the fields of floor acoustics and vibration serviceability are tightly connected, they have been developing independently. This leads to a load-bearing structure being designed without considering acoustics, and then adding a layer to meet the acoustical requirements without considering the vibration serviceability. Integrating the two performance criteria in floor design unlocks potential for further weight savings. This critical review paper provides an initial step towards bridging the gap between vibration serviceability and acoustics of floors by highlighting opportunities for their future integration. First, it synthesises their differences, similarities, and overlapping mechanisms, particularly in the low-frequency range. Then, it reviews the literature to identify existing mitigation strategies and critically evaluates their influence on floor performance from both vibration and acoustic perspectives. Finally, the paper outlines key research gaps, identifies strategies with potential for synergistic interaction, and proposes a starting point for a more holistic, integrated approach to lightweight floor design. The paper identifies the following 10 strategies for improving the vibroacoustic floor performance: reducing excitation, adding stiffness and mass, granular infill, floating floor, suspended ceiling, cavity absorbers, viscoelastic damping layer, tuned mass damper, and active mass damper. Strategies that emerge as especially promising for holistic consideration are those that target the low-frequency range, where lightweight floors are acoustically most problematic and where vibration serviceability and acoustics overlap. These include adding a viscoelastic layer between the base floor and topping, adding tuned or active mass dampers, and tuning the suspended ceiling to dampen the first floor mode. A key hypothesis is proposed that integrating vibration serviceability and acoustics through mitigation strategies that leverage the damping of low-frequency global modes enables better material utilisation in lightweight floors. To confirm or reject the hypothesis, future studies should jointly investigate low-frequency vibroacoustic floor behaviour within an integrated experimental and modelling framework.</dc:description><dc:date>2026</dc:date><dc:date>2026-07-17 09:21:23</dc:date><dc:type>Članek v reviji</dc:type><dc:identifier>184927</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>UDK: 624.07:531</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>ISSN pri članku: 1873-684X</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.buildenv.2026.114883</dc:identifier><dc:identifier>COBISS_ID: 285184771</dc:identifier><dc:language>sl</dc:language></metadata>
