Nassrallah Flora G, Giguere Christian, Dajani Hilmi R, Ellaham Nicolas N
School of Rehabilitation Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences; School of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Faculty of Engineering, University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada.
Noise Health. 2016 Mar-Apr;18(81):62-77. doi: 10.4103/1463-1741.178479.
The measurement of noise exposure from communication headsets poses a methodological challenge. Although several standards describe methods for general noise measurements in occupational settings, these are not directly applicable to noise assessments under communication headsets. For measurements under occluded ears, specialized methods have been specified by the International Standards Organization (ISO 11904) such as the microphone in a real ear and manikin techniques. Simpler methods have also been proposed in some national standards such as the use of general purpose artificial ears and simulators in conjunction with single number corrections to convert measurements to the equivalent diffuse field. However, little is known about the measurement agreement between these various methods and the acoustic manikin technique. Twelve experts positioned circum-aural, supra-aural and insert communication headsets on four different measurement setups (Type 1, Type 2, Type 3.3 artificial ears, and acoustic manikin). Fit-refit measurements of four audio communication signals were taken under quiet laboratory conditions. Data were transformed into equivalent diffuse-field sound levels using third-octave procedures. Results indicate that the Type 1 artificial ear is not suited for the measurement of sound exposure under communication headsets, while Type 2 and Type 3.3 artificial ears are in good agreement with the acoustic manikin technique. Single number corrections were found to introduce a large measurement uncertainty, making the use of the third-octave transformation preferable.
测量通信耳机的噪声暴露带来了方法学上的挑战。尽管有几个标准描述了职业环境中一般噪声测量的方法,但这些方法并不直接适用于通信耳机下的噪声评估。对于耳塞式测量,国际标准化组织(ISO 11904)已经规定了专门的方法,如真耳中的麦克风和人体模型技术。一些国家标准也提出了更简单的方法,如使用通用人工耳和模拟器,并结合单一数字校正将测量值转换为等效扩散场。然而,对于这些不同方法与声学人体模型技术之间的测量一致性知之甚少。十二位专家在四种不同的测量设置(1型、2型、3.3型人工耳和声学人体模型)上放置了耳周式、耳上式和插入式通信耳机。在安静的实验室条件下对四种音频通信信号进行了佩戴-重新佩戴测量。使用倍频程程序将数据转换为等效扩散场声级。结果表明,1型人工耳不适合测量通信耳机下的声暴露,而2型和3.3型人工耳与声学人体模型技术的一致性良好。发现单一数字校正会引入较大的测量不确定性,因此使用倍频程变换更为可取。