Suppr超能文献

高、中、低法——更好的降噪等级?

The high, medium, and low method--a better noise reduction rating?

作者信息

Behar A

机构信息

Ontario Hydro, Pickering, Canada.

出版信息

Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 1990 Dec;51(12):659-62. doi: 10.1080/15298669091370310.

Abstract

This paper compares hearing protector attenuations calculated using National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) method No. 1 ("long method") and the HML method. The study was done on 144 combinations of 12 noises and 12 protectors. In each case, the attenuation was calculated using each of the above methods. The difference between attenuations was used to define the accuracy of the high, medium, and low (HML) method. It was found that the attenuations calculated using the HML method are almost always lower than those calculated using the NIOSH method. However, the differences between both attenuations are well within the field noise level measurement errors. Consequently, the HML method appears to be an acceptable approximation of the NIOSH method, offering the additional advantage of being easier to apply. The higher accuracy of the HML method, when compared to the Noise Reduction Rating (NRR), makes is preferable for applications in industrial hearing conservation programs.

摘要

本文比较了使用美国国家职业安全与健康研究所(NIOSH)方法1(“长方法”)和HML方法计算出的听力保护器衰减值。该研究针对12种噪声和12种保护器的144种组合进行。在每种情况下,均使用上述每种方法计算衰减值。衰减值之间的差异用于定义高、中、低(HML)方法的准确性。结果发现,使用HML方法计算出的衰减值几乎总是低于使用NIOSH方法计算出的衰减值。然而,两种衰减值之间的差异完全在现场噪声水平测量误差范围内。因此,HML方法似乎是NIOSH方法的可接受近似方法,还具有更易于应用的额外优势。与降噪等级(NRR)相比,HML方法具有更高的准确性,因此更适合应用于工业听力保护计划。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验