scholarly journals On the conversion between sound pressure and particle motion

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erwin Jansen ◽  
Mark Prior ◽  
Eef Brouns
2018 ◽  
Vol 143 (3) ◽  
pp. 1712-1712
Author(s):  
Christine Erbe ◽  
Miles Parsons ◽  
Alec J. Duncan ◽  
Klaus Lucke ◽  
Alexander Gavrilov ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 74 (3) ◽  
pp. 635-651 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anthony D. Hawkins ◽  
Arthur N. Popper

Increasing attention is being paid to the ecological consequences of underwater noise generated by human activities such as shipping and maritime industries including, but not limited to, oil and gas exploration and extraction, sonar systems, dredging and the construction of offshore renewable energy devices. There is particular concern over the extension of these activities into previously undeveloped areas of the oceans, including Polar Regions and areas of coral reef habitat. Most of the concern by regulators and others has focussed upon effects upon marine mammals and other protected species. However, examining the impacts upon the overall ecology of affected habitats is also important as it may be dominated by effects upon the far larger biomasses of fishes and invertebrates, which do not have the same degree of legal protection. Many of these assessments of the impact of noise on fishes and invertebrates have overlooked important issues, including the sensitivity of a substantial proportion of these species to particle motion rather than sound pressure. Attempts have been made to establish sound exposure criteria setting regulatory limits to the levels of noise in terms of effects upon mortality levels, injury to tissues, hearing abilities, behaviour, and physiology. However, such criteria have almost exclusively been developed for marine mammals. Criteria for fishes and invertebrates have often had to be assumed, or they have been derived from poorly designed and controlled studies. Moreover, the metrics employed to describe sounds from different sources have often been inappropriate, especially for fishes, and invertebrates, as they have been based on sound pressure rather than particle motion. In addition, the sound propagation models employed to assess the distances over which effects might occur have seldom been validated by actual measurements and are especially poor at dealing with transmission under shallow water conditions, close to or within the seabed, or at the surface. Finally, impacts on fish and invertebrate populations are often unknown and remain unassessed. This paper considers the problems of assessing the impact of noise upon fishes and invertebrates and the assessment procedures that need to be implemented to protect these animals and the marine ecosystems of which they form an integral part. The paper also suggests directions for future research and planning that, if implemented, will provide for a far better scientific and regulatory basis for dealing with effects of noise on aquatic life.


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marta Solé ◽  
Peter Sigray ◽  
Marc Lenoir ◽  
Mike van der Schaar ◽  
Emilia Lalander ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-215 ◽  
Author(s):  
Franklin Bretschneider ◽  
Herman van Veen ◽  
Peter F.M. Teunis ◽  
Robert C. Peters ◽  
Albert V. van den Berg

In order to investigate the hearing capacities of adult zebrafish (Danio rerio), wild type zebrafish were conditioned to both sound pressure and particle motion in a respondent conditioning paradigm. Sound fields were generated by five underwater loudspeakers in a cylindrical tank, which allows separate control of sound pressure and particle motion. Sound stimuli were soft-switched sound pulses having a strength (RMS) of 0.4 to 5 Pa sound pressure (112 to 134 dB re 1 μPa), 6.7 × 10−7 to 6.7 × 10−6 m/s particle velocity or a combination thereof. Frequencies used were 800 Hz or 250 Hz. During the test a fish was placed in the acoustic centre of the tank, confined in a soft nylon mesh fitted with two silver chloride recording electrodes to measure both changes in position and the ventilatory response. Each sound presentation was followed by a brief mechanical jerk of the fish cage (unconditioned stimulus). The startling response to the unconditioned stimulus was thus coupled to the sound signal (conditioned stimulus). Responses were scored as changes in fish position and/or ventilatory rhythm, occurring during or after the sound pulses, but before the unconditioned stimulus. In this way, we found that wildtype zebrafish respond to artificial sounds having either predominantly sound pressure or particle motion. Discrimination of directionally different sounds could not be established. The method is suited well to probe other auditory capabilities, and to test zebrafish mutants lacking one or more otoliths.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. e0230578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tanja Schulz-Mirbach ◽  
Friedrich Ladich ◽  
Alberto Mittone ◽  
Margie Olbinado ◽  
Alberto Bravin ◽  
...  

1992 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 52-55 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gail L. MacLean ◽  
Andrew Stuart ◽  
Robert Stenstrom

Differences in real ear sound pressure levels (SPLs) with three portable stereo system (PSS) earphones (supraaural [Sony Model MDR-44], semiaural [Sony Model MDR-A15L], and insert [Sony Model MDR-E225]) were investigated. Twelve adult men served as subjects. Frequency response, high frequency average (HFA) output, peak output, peak output frequency, and overall RMS output for each PSS earphone were obtained with a probe tube microphone system (Fonix 6500 Hearing Aid Test System). Results indicated a significant difference in mean RMS outputs with nonsignificant differences in mean HFA outputs, peak outputs, and peak output frequencies among PSS earphones. Differences in mean overall RMS outputs were attributed to differences in low-frequency effects that were observed among the frequency responses of the three PSS earphones. It is suggested that one cannot assume equivalent real ear SPLs, with equivalent inputs, among different styles of PSS earphones.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document