Design of a pulse generator and shock tube for measuring hearing protector attenuation of high-amplitude impulsive noise

The effectiveness of hearing protectors against high amplitude impulse noise levels remains the subject of research with objective testing techniques using acoustic test fixtures offering the only realistic method of providing rapid performance data for protector design and qualification. The work presented in this paper examines a prototype test method based on a shock tube and acoustic test fixture for the evaluation of protectors against high-level impulsive noise where established real ear attenuation at threshold methods would be impractical to apply. The results show that the system is capable of producing controlled repeatable high amplitude pressure pulses of variable duration for testing hearing protection devices in a grazing wave type test. A series of pilot tests illustrate how the system can have a sufficient self-insertion loss to reject flanking noise and allow the measurement of protector attenuations of up to 45 dB with little corruption from flanking noise.     

MIRE-IL methodology applied to measuring the noise attenuation of earmuff hearing protectors

This article describes an objective methodology for measuring the noise attenuation of earmuff hearing protectors using as a reference the method known as microphone-in-real-ear (MIRE). The methodology implements the insertion loss (IL) paradigm, in which IL is measured using miniature microphones, specially designed to comply with ANSI and ISO standards for the MIRE technique. The results for four different hearing protectors are compared with the subjective method known as real-ear-attenuation-at-threshold (REAT). Correction factors are included in the methodology to account for external effects such as physiological noise and bone conduction. The objective method predicted well the real protection of the earmuffs and the proposed methodology showed lower standard deviation values than the REAT method.     

Measurement of the attenuation characteristics of nonlinear hearing protective devices using the auditory brain stem response

The purpose of this study was to determine the feasibility of using the auditory brain stem response (ABR) as a method of measuring the attenuation characteristics of nonlinear hearing protective devices. Sound field ABRs were recorded from seven normal hearing subjects with and without hearing protection. Three hearing protectors (two nonlinear and one linear) were evaluated. Test stimuli, consisting of 4000-Hz tone pips, were presented in a sound field. Linearity and the amount of attenuation for each hearing protector were derived by comparing the protected and unprotected latency-intensity functions for wave I of the ABR. Results indicate that the ABR may be used effectively to measure the attenuation characteristics of linear and nonlinear hearing protectors for high-frequency impulse-type stimuli.     

Development of a new standard laboratory protocol for estimation of the field attenuation of hearing protection devices: sample size necessary to provide acceptable reproducibility

The mandate of ASA Working Group S12/WG11 has been to develop "laboratory and/or field procedure(s) that yield useful estimates of field performance" of hearing protection devices (HPDs). A real-ear attenuation at threshold procedure was selected, devised, tested for one earmuff and three earplugs via an interlaboratory study involving five laboratories and 147 subjects, and incorporated into a new standard that was approved in 1997 [Royster et al., "Development of a new standard laboratory protocol for estimating the field attenuation of hearing protection devices. Part I. Research of Working Group 11, Accredited Standards Committee S 12, Noise," J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 99, 1506-1526; ANSI, S12.6-1997, "American National Standard method for measuring real-ear attenuation of hearing protectors" (American National Standards Institute, New York, 1997)]. The subject-fit methodology of ANSI S12.6-1997 relies upon listeners who are audiometrically proficient, but inexperienced in the use of HPDs. Whenever a new method is adopted, it is important to know the effects of variability on the power of the measurements. In evaluation of protector noise reduction determined by experimenter-fit, informed-user-fit, and subject-fit methods, interlaboratory reproducibility was found to be best for the subject-fit method. Formulas were derived for determining the minimum detectable difference between attenuation measurements and for determining the number of subjects necessary to achieve a selected level of precision. For a precision of 6 dB, the study found that the minimum number of subjects was 4 for the Bilsom UF-1 earmuff, 10 for the E.A.R Classic earplug, 31 for the Willson EP100 earplug, and 22 for the PlasMed V-51R earplug.     

Selection of hearing protectors

A method for selection of hearing protectors based on attenuation and comfort is presented. For the attenuation, the data provided by the manufacturer are used after being derated. A protector is selected when its attenuation is higher than the measured (or calculated) noise exposure minus the criterion level set by regulations or legislation. When large numbers of workers are involved, group noise exposure and associated standard deviation are to be used.Comfort is assessed by using a specially developed questionnaire. Protectors are distributed to ten workers who have to wear them during an entire shift. The questionnaire is completed prior to and after wearing the protectors.     

A signal generator for testing of hearing protectors

The measurement of the acoustical attenuation of hearing protectors requires a signal generator whose characteristics are specified in the ANSI S3.19-1974 Standard. This paper describes such a generator which was constructed by modifying a regular screening audiometer, including a pink noise generator followed by nine one-third octave band filters and an additional 2·5 dB attenuator. Detailed information on the construction and performance of the generator is provided in the paper. The generator, which is relatively easy to build, has proved to be reliable for uses in the laboratory, as well as in the field.     

Real-ear attenuation of earmuffs in normal-hearing and hearing-impaired individuals

Many of the 9 million workers exposed to average noise levels of 85 dB (A) and above are required to wear hearing protection devices, and many of these workers have already developed noise-induced hearing impairments. There is some evidence in the literature that hearing-impaired users may not receive as much attenuation from hearing protectors as normal-hearing users. This study assessed real-ear attenuation at threshold for ten normal-hearing and ten hearing-impaired subjects using a set of David Clark 10A earmuffs. Testing procedures followed the specifications of ANSI S12.6-1984. The results showed that the hearing-impaired subjects received slightly more attenuation than the normal-hearing subjects at all frequencies, but these differences were not statistically significant. These results provide additional support to the finding that hearing protection devices are capable of providing as much attenuation to hearing-impaired users as they do to normal-hearing individuals.     

Methods of measuring the attenuation of hearing protection devices

The published literature describing three real-ear-attenuation-at-threshold (REAT), nine above-threshold, and four objective methods of measuring hearing protector attenuation is reviewed and analyzed with regard to the accuracy, practicality, and applicability of the various techniques. The analysis indicates that the REAT method is one of the most accurate available techniques since it assesses all of the sound paths to the occluded ear and, depending upon the experimenter's intention, can reflect actual in-use attenuation as well. An artifact in the REAT paradigm is that masking in the occluded ear due to physiological noise can spuriously increase low-frequency (less than or equal to 500 Hz) attenuation, although the error never exceeds approximately 5 dB, regardless of the device, except below 125 Hz. Since the preponderance of available data indicates that attenuation is independent of sound level for intentionally linear protectors, the use of above-threshold procedures to evaluate attenuation is not a necessity. An exception exists in the case of impulsive noises, for which the existing data are not unequivocal with regard to hearing protector response characteristics. Two of the objective methods (acoustical test fixture and microphone in real ear) are considerable time savers. All objective procedures are lacking in their ability to accurately determine the importance of the flanking bone-conduction paths, although some authors have incorporated this feature as a post-measurement correction. The microphone in real-ear approach is suggested to be one of the most promising for future standardization efforts and research purposes, and the acoustical test fixture technique is recommended (with certain reservations) for quality control and buyer acceptance testing.     

Simplified hearing protector ratings—an international comparison

A computer was programmed to model the distributions of dB(A) levels reaching the ears of an imaginary workforce wearing hearing protectors selected on the basis of either octave band attenuation values or various simplified ratings in use in Australia, Germany, Poland, Spain or the U.S.A. Both multi-valued and single-valued versions of dB(A) reduction and sound level conversion ratings were considered. Ratings were compared in terms of precision and protection rate and the comparisons were replicated for different samples of noise spectra (N = 400) and hearing protectors (N = 70) to establish the generality of the conclusions. Different countries adopt different approaches to the measurement of octave band attenuation values and the consequences of these differences were investigated. All rating systems have built-in correction factors to account for hearing protector performance variability and the merits of these were determined in the light of their ultimate effects on the distribution of dB(A) levels reaching wearers' ears. It was concluded that the optimum rating is one that enables the dB(A) level reaching wearers to be estimated by subtracting a single rating value from the dB(C) level of the noise environment, the rating value to be determined for a pink noise spectrum from mean minus one standard deviation octave band attenuation values with further protection rate adjustments being achieved by the use of a constant correction factor.     

Speech production in noise with and without hearing protection

People working in noisy environments often complain of difficulty communicating when they wear hearing protection. It was hypothesized that part of the workers' communication difficulties stem from changes in speech production that occur when hearing protectors are worn. To address this possibility, overall and one-third-octave-band SPL measurements were obtained for 16 men and 16 women as they produced connected speech while wearing foam, flange, or no earplugs (open ears) in quiet and in pink noise at 60, 70, 80, 90, and 100 dB SPL. The attenuation and the occlusion effect produced by the earplugs were measured. The Speech Intelligibility Index (SII) was also calculated for each condition. The talkers produced lower overall speech levels, speech-to-noise ratios, and SII values, and less high-frequency speech energy, when they wore earplugs compared with the open-ear condition. Small differences in the speech measures between the talkers wearing foam and flange earplugs were observed. Overall, the results of the study indicate that talkers wearing earplugs (and consequently their listeners) are at a disadvantage when communicating in noise.     

Is real-ear attenuation at threshold a function of hearing level?

In the course of measuring the real-ear attenuation at threshold (REAT) of experimenter-inserted E-A-R foam earplugs on 100 subjects, a statistically significant correlation was observed between attenuation and hearing level (for normal listeners, HTL less than or equal to 20 dB) at test frequencies from 2-8 kHz. Listeners with more sensitive hearing obtained better protection. The relationship was most robust at 6 and 8 kHz. For hearing levels greater than 20 dB, attenuation appeared independent of hearing level. A hypothesis was developed to explain the relationship for the normal listeners, based upon the fact that the high-frequency attenuation of the earplug was nearly bone-conduction limited. The hypothesis suggested that the attenuation of a hearing protector that provided substantially lower protection would not exhibit the same relationship. Data for such a device were collected for 70 subjects, and indeed demonstrated reduced correlation between attenuation and hearing level. Implications of the results of the experiments are discussed with regard to hearing level requirements for hearing protector attenuation test subjects, utilization of hearing-impaired listeners to measure REAT at suprathreshold (with respect to normal listeners) sound pressure levels, and linearity of hearing protector attenuation as a function of sound level.     

Is it necessary to measure hearing protector attenuation at 3.15 and 6.3 kHz?

The real-ear attenuation data for 81 different hearing protectors were analyzed with respect to the errors that would arise if, instead of averaging the 1/3-octave-band results at 3.15 and 4 kHz and 6.3 and 8 kHz, respectively, the octave-band attenuation at 4 and 8 kHz was estimated from only the 1/3-octave-band data at those two frequencies. Errors as large as 3-4 dB were found to occur in rare instances, but more typically were in the range of 0.5-1.5 dB. However, in terms of computation of an overall noise reduction rating such as the NRR, the effect of excluding the 3.15- and 6.3-kHz data led to errors that averaged only 0.1 dB and never exceeded 0.3 dB, except in one instance, where the error was 0.6 dB. It was concluded that there is little value in measuring real-ear attenuation in a diffuse sound field at the frequencies of 3.15 and 6.3 kHz for applications in which hearing protector attenuation data are normally utilized.     

Measurement of the real-ear attenuation of hearing protectors according to the South African Standard SABS 572 1973

In general current national standards for the measurement of the real-ear attenuation of hearing protectors involve the use of a real-ear attenuation at threshold, or REAT method. One of the few which does not is the South African Standard SABS 572 1973. This involves use of a loudness balance method by means of which, since it is performed at supra-threshold levels, one avoids some of the problems associated with REAT methods. The values of attenuation generated by this method have been reported to be substantially lower than those produced by not only REAT methods but also previous loudness balance methods. The nature of these discrepancies was not fully explained by the authors of the standard and therefore a further investigation of this method was felt to be necessary. Accordingly, a series of measurements have been performed in accordance with the instructions contained in SABS 572 1973. The results of these experiments are of the same character as those described by the authors of the standard. Attenuation values were generated which were appreciably less than those produced by REAT methods. Efforts were made to determine the cause of the discrepancies. Evidence from the literature together with the results from a subsidiary experiment has demonstrated that SABS 572 1973 is probably in error. There is an implicit assumption in the standard that the attenuation of a circumaural protector is substantially augmented by the introduction of an insert earphone into the ear beneath the protector cap. This view was not corroborated by the experimental evidence and it is concluded that SABS 572 1973 requires major modification.     

Hearing protection and warning sounds in industry—a review

Member States of the European Economic Community are required to introduce Regulations which, in part, make the wearing of hearing protection mandatory under certain noise exposure conditions. Provisions are also to be introduced which can take into account possible difficulties that the wearer may have in the perception of warning sounds. This paper reviews the evidence that is relevant to any expert appraisal which formed part of a scheme of exemptions from the otherwise mandatory requirement.The evidence indicates that, when worn by people with normal hearing, the protectors will not in general impair the perception of appropriately selected alarm sounds. However, specific conditions are identified where the hearing protectors may reduce the effectiveness of some warning sounds, in particular for those machinery sounds which are associated with potential danger and for those people with an existing noise-induced hearing loss. It is recommended that the design of warning systems and the development of work practices should take account of possible failures in the perception of auditory warnings.     

Earmuff comfort

In many industrial and military situations it is not practical or economical to reduce ambient noise to levels that present neither a hazard to hearing nor annoyance. In these situations, personal hearing protection devices are capable of reducing the noise by 20–30 dB. Although the use of a hearing protector is recommended as a temporary solution until action is taken to control the noise, in practice, it ends up as a permanent solution in most cases. Therefore, hearing protectors must be both efficient in terms of noise attenuation and comfortable to wear. Comfort in this case is related to the agreement of the user to wear the hearing protector consistently and correctly at all times. The purpose of this paper is, firstly, to provide some background on the publications related to earmuff comfort, most of which are based on measurement of the total headband force and subjective evaluation using questionnaires. Most of the published results show a weak correlation between total headband force and subjective evaluation. Secondly, this paper presents a new method to measure the contact pressure distribution between the earmuff cushions and the circumaural flesh of the human head and estimate a comfort index. The comfort parameters were investigated and equations developed to calculate comfort indices and overall quality indices. The most important calculated comfort index is measured from the contact pressure distribution and correlated with a subjective evaluation. Measurement results for the pressure distribution of 10 earmuffs show good correlation with the subjective evaluation.     

Hybrid feedforward-feedback active noise reduction for hearing protection and communication

A hybrid active noise reduction (ANR) architecture is presented and validated for a circumaural earcup and a communication earplug. The hybrid system combines source-independent feedback ANR with a Lyapunov-tuned leaky LMS filter (LyLMS) improving gain stability margins over feedforward ANR alone. In flat plate testing, the earcup demonstrates an overall C-weighted total noise reduction of 40 dB and 30-32 dB, respectively, for 50-800 Hz sum-of-tones noise and for aircraft or helicopter cockpit noise, improving low frequency (<100 Hz) performance by up to 15 dB over either control component acting individually. For the earplug, a filtered-X implementation of the LyLMS accommodates its nonconstant cancellation path gain. A fast time-domain identification method provides a high-fidelity, computationally efficient, infinite impulse response cancellation path model, which is used for both the filtered-X implementation and communication feedthrough. Insertion loss measurements made with a manikin show overall C-weighted total noise reduction provided by the ANR earplug of 46-48 dB for sum-of-tones 80-2000 Hz and 40-41 dB from 63 to 3000 Hz for UH-60 helicopter noise, with negligible degradation in attenuation during speech communication. For both hearing protectors, a stability metric improves by a factor of 2 to several orders of magnitude through hybrid ANR.     

Effects of hearing protector devices on speech intelligibility

The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of hearing protection devices (HPDs) on the understanding of speech in young adults with normal hearing, both in a silent situation and in the presence of ambient noise. The experimental research was carried out with the following variables: five different conditions of HPD use (without protectors, with two earplugs and with two earmuffs); a type of noise (pink noise); 4 test levels (60, 70, 80 and 90 dB[A]); 6 signal/noise ratios (without noise, +5, +10, zero, −5 and −10 dB); 5 repetitions for each case, totalling 600 tests with 10 monosyllables in each one. The variable measure was the percentage of correctly heard words (monosyllabic) in the test. The results revealed that, at the lowest levels (60 and 70 dB), the protectors reduced the intelligibility of speech (compared to the tests without protectors) while, in the presence of ambient noise levels of 80 and 90 dB and unfavourable signal/noise ratios (0, −5 and −10 dB), the HPDs improved the intelligibility. A comparison of the effectiveness of earplugs versus earmuffs showed that the former offer greater efficiency in respect to the recognition of speech, providing a 30% improvement over situations in which no protection is used. As might be expected, this study confirmed that the protectors' influence on speech intelligibility is related directly to the spectral curve of the protector's attenuation.     

The role of acoustical characteristics in the perception of warning sounds and the effects of wearing hearing protection

The relative importance of the acoustical contrasts of a warning sound with other irrelevant sounds and with the ambient noise has been investigated in the context of the perception of warning sounds and the effects of hearing protection being worn by normally hearing subjects. The results indicate that both contrast factors had an influence on the attention demand of the auditory warnings, but that the contrast with the irrelevant sounds was more potent for the specific stimuli investigated. Thus, they emphasize the importance of including a typical recognition requirement when assessing the attention demand of warning sounds. A small additional reduction in the attention demand of both sounds was evident when the subjects were wearing hearing protectors. This effect could occur in the industrial setting, but further research is required to establish its extent and implications.     

Speech recognition in noise with active and passive hearing protectors: a comparative study

The perceived negative influence of standard hearing protectors on communication is a common argument for not wearing them. Thus, "augmented" protectors have been developed to improve speech intelligibility. Nevertheless, their actual benefit remains a point of concern. In this paper, speech perception with active earplugs is compared to standard passive custom-made earplugs. The two types of active protectors included amplify the incoming sound with a fixed level or to a user selected fraction of the maximum safe level. For the latter type, minimal and maximal amplification are selected. To compare speech intelligibility, 20 different speech-in-noise fragments are presented to 60 normal-hearing subjects and speech recognition is scored. The background noise is selected from realistic industrial noise samples with different intensity, frequency, and temporal characteristics. Statistical analyses suggest that the protectors' performance strongly depends on the noise condition. The active protectors with minimal amplification outclass the others for the most difficult and the easiest situations, but they also limit binaural listening. In other conditions, the passive protectors clearly surpass their active counterparts. Subsequently, test fragments are analyzed acoustically to clarify the results. This provides useful information for developing prototypes, but also indicates that tests with human subjects remain essential.     

Use of the sound levels of noise for assessing the adequacy of hearing protectors

The dB(A) sound level of a noise is accepted as a measure of the damage risk to unprotected ears but often it is not a reliable guide to the risk to ears fitted with hearing protectors. For any dB(A) level inside a protector, normally there will be substantially higher sound levels outside that protector. This paper shows how, from sequential frequency attenuation bands of the protector, and sound level weightings, external sound levels can be calculated, below which the noise inside the protector does not exceed a chosen dB(A) level. Further valuable information may be obtained by mapping external dB(A) and dB(C) levels to cover all possible noise spectra that give the chosen dB(A) level inside the protector. Thus, from a pair of measured sound levels, use of the method indicates whether the protector is sufficient or not, or whether more detailed measurment of the noise is required. This knowledge enhances the scope of the sound level meter and reduces the need for frequency analysis of industrial noise. Its application should be a helpful addition to the data provided by suppliers of hearing protectors.