ANSI S12.42-2010 measurements of impulse peak insertion loss for passive hearing protectors

2011 ◽  
Vol 130 (4) ◽  
pp. 2435-2435
Author(s):  
Kevin Michael ◽  
Jeff G. Schmitt
Keyword(s):  
Insertion Loss ◽  
Hearing Protectors ◽  
Passive Hearing

Effective attenuation performance of passive hearing protectors: A temporary threshold shift study

2012 ◽  
Vol 132 (3) ◽  
pp. 2014-2014
Author(s):  
Richard L. McKinley ◽  
Hilary L. Gallagher ◽  
Melissa Theis
Keyword(s):  
Threshold Shift ◽  
Temporary Threshold Shift ◽  
Hearing Protectors ◽  
Passive Hearing ◽  
Shift Study

scholarly journals Use of passive hearing protectors and adaptive noise reduction for field recording of otoacoustic emissions in industrial noise

2013 ◽  
Vol 133 (5) ◽  
pp. 3274-3274
Author(s):  
Vincent Nadon ◽  
Annelies Bockstael ◽  
Hannah Keppler ◽  
Dick Botteldooren ◽  
Jean-Marc Lina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Industrial Noise ◽  
Field Recording ◽  
Hearing Protectors ◽  
Passive Hearing ◽  
Adaptive Noise

Measurement of impulse peak insertion loss for five hearing protectors.

2011 ◽  
Vol 129 (4) ◽  
pp. 2651-2651
Author(s):  
William J. Murphy ◽  
Gregory A. Flamme ◽  
Amir Khan ◽  
Joseph Echt ◽  
Belinda C. Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Insertion Loss ◽  
Hearing Protectors

Psychophysical and Physical Techniques for Measuring the Attenuation of Hearing Protectors in the Field

1993 ◽  
Vol 37 (14) ◽  
pp. 999-1003
Author(s):  
Daniel W. Mauney
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Noise Reduction ◽  
Insertion Loss ◽  
Noise Exposure ◽  
Bone Conduction ◽  
Hearing Protectors ◽  
Alternative Measures ◽  
Hearing Protector ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Occlusion Effect

A field-implementable measure is needed to estimate the attenuation workers achieve with their hearing protectors in the field. Manufacturer-supplied values overestimate in-field attenuation and reliance on these values could result in greater noise exposure, thus contributing to hearing loss. Alternative measures for assessing a hearing protector's effectiveness were evaluated through comparison to the standardized real-ear attenuation at threshold (1/3-REAT) method (ANSI S3.19-1974). These measures, termed microphone in real ear (MIRE), used miniature microphones underneath and outside of the hearing protector to physically measure the attenuation of the protector using both insertion loss (IL-MIRE) and noise reduction (NR-MIRE) techniques. Results indicate that the MIRE measures differ significantly from the 1/3-REAT method (a psychophysical technique) for attenuation collapsed across protectors, with absolute differences as great as 6.6 dB and the direction of the difference changing due to frequency. At 125 Hz, the MIRE metrics yielded lower attenuation, while from 500 to 8000 Hz, the 1/3-REAT method generally yielded lower attenuation. These differences may be due in part to the occlusion effect and the bone conduction of sound. The size and consistency of these differences across HPDs suggest that these measures hold promise for providing quick and relatively accurate estimations of an HPD's attenuation in the field.

Using impulsive peak insertion loss of hearing protectors with impulsive damage risk criteria

2012 ◽  
Vol 131 (4) ◽  
pp. 3532-3532
Author(s):  
Richard McKinley ◽  
Hilary Gallagher ◽  
William Murphy
Keyword(s):  
Insertion Loss ◽  
Risk Criteria ◽  
Hearing Protectors ◽  
Loss Of Hearing ◽  
Damage Risk
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document