ArticlePDF Available

AT-EAR NOISE LEVELS UNDER THE HELMET: A FIELD STUDY ON NOISE EXPOSURE OF YOUNG MOTORCYCLISTS

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

At-ear noise exposure assessments of motorcyclists, with the function of speed, would be unsafe as on-road data acquisition has certain constraints including the operations and portability of appropriate instrument. Currently, there are no standardized protocols and methods for measuring the noise under motorcycle helmets. Furthermore, standard permissible noise emission levels for commuter motorcyclists are also not defined. Therefore, this study was aimed to investigate the motorcycle noise exposure assessments in realistic environment among young riders. A personal dosimeter was utilized to calculate the daily noise exposure level (L Aeq , 8h) under three different standards including: OSHA-HC Personal dosimeter results (n=52) revealed the average noise exposure level of 93.64 dBA, 92.51 dBA, 95.29 dBA for OSHA-HC, OSHA-PEL and ACGIH/NIOSH respectively. The mean Time-Weighted Average (TWA) was 76.82 dBA, 75.69 dBA, 85.16 dBA for OSHA-HC, OSHA-PEL and ACGIH/NIOSH respectively. Under the ACGIH and NIOSH standard, the TWA for motorcyclists is at hazardous limits, which requires further investigations associated with health effects on riders. Standardized methods and configurations should be set for assessing noise exposure related to the motorcycling.
Content may be subject to copyright.
AT-EAR NOISE LEVELS UNDER THE HELMET: A FIELD STUDY ON NOISE
EXPOSURE OF YOUNG MOTORCYCLISTS
A. Ali1,3,*, R. M. Hussain2, M. Abdullah1, N. C. Dom1
1Department of Environmental Health and Safety, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universiti
Teknologi MARA, Selangor Malaysia
2Department of Medical Imaging Technology, Faculty of Health Sciences, Universiti
Teknologi MARA, Selangor Malaysia
3Department of Environmental Management and Policy, Faculty of Engineering, Balochistan
University of Information Technology, Engineering and Management Sciences, Quetta,
Pakistan
Published online: 24 February 2018
ABSTRACT
At-ear noise exposure assessments of motorcyclists, with the function of speed, would be
unsafe as on-road data acquisition has certain constraints including the operations and
portability of appropriate instrument. Currently, there are no standardized protocols and
methods for measuring the noise under motorcycle helmets. Furthermore, standard
permissible noise emission levels for commuter motorcyclists are also not defined. Therefore,
this study was aimed to investigate the motorcycle noise exposure assessments in realistic
environment among young riders. A personal dosimeter was utilized to calculate the daily
noise exposure level (LAeq, 8h) under three different standards including: OSHA-HC
(Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Hearing Conservation), OSHA-PEL
(Permissible Emission Level) and ACGIH/NIOSH (American Conference of Governmental
Industrial Hygienists/ National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health). The study design
consisted of noise assessment of riders (age range:19 to 25 years) at-ear under the open-face
helmet in-realistic situation (main road to the motorway) motorcycling in dry weather
conditions.
Author Correspondence, e-mail: author@gmail.com
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4314/jfas.v10i3s.18
Journal of Fundamental and Applied Sciences
ISSN 1112-9867
Available online at http://www.jfas.info
Research Article
Special Issue
Journal of Fundamental and Applied Sciences is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0
International License. Libraries Resource Directory. We are listed under Research Associations category.
A. Ali et al. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018, 10(3S), 218-231 219
Personal dosimeter results (n=52) revealed the average noise exposure level of 93.64 dBA,
92.51 dBA, 95.29 dBA for OSHA-HC, OSHA-PEL and ACGIH/NIOSH respectively. The
mean Time-Weighted Average (TWA) was 76.82 dBA, 75.69 dBA, 85.16 dBA for OSHA-
HC, OSHA-PEL and ACGIH/NIOSH respectively. Under the ACGIH and NIOSH standard,
the TWA for motorcyclists is at hazardous limits, which requires further investigations
associated with health effects on riders. Standardized methods and configurations should be
set for assessing noise exposure related to the motorcycling.
Keywords: Motorcycle noise, Wind noise, Dosimeter, OSHA, ACGIH
INTRODUCTION
Motorcycles are recognized as a convenient form of transport as it causes less damage to the
road surface, lessens traffic congestion and consumes less fuel than motorcars. Motorcycling
carries obvious and some less obvious hazards, where noise exposure and its related health
effects are one of the less obvious hazards (Binnington et al., 1993). Quieter machines have
been developed by the manufacturers with increasingly faster motorcycles, but aeroacoustics
noise stands more important for motorcycling and helmet design (Jordan et al., 2004). The
unavoidable component associated with motorcycling is noise, which has been studied though
numerous studies (Kennedy et al., 2014).
Since late 80’s, it has been noted that motorcycle riders are exposed to noise levels above 90 d
BA at 50 km/h (30 mph), which increases with increasing speed up to 105 dBA at 115 km/h
(70 mph)(Jordan et al., 2004). Just over 20 years, noise has been recognized as hearing hazard
due to motorcycling noise inside the helmet. Motorcyclists’ noise exposure is unique and
greatly influenced by the transmission through the helmet (Kennedy et al., 2014). Numerous
studies investigated the noise sources, such as wind flow around the helmet, the sound of an
engine and the combined windscreen generates interaction that sound at-ear to the rider
(Carley et al., 2011; Jordan et al., 2004). The discrepancies between various motorcycling
speeds and its associated noise exposure reported in previous studies were explained by
Carley et al., (2011) as an external factor such as wind speed, engine, windscreen, helmet type
and riding position.
In reported literature, a difference exists between sound pressure level with a function of
riding speed (Kennedy et al., 2013). Numerous studies adopted varies measurement
techniques under controlled study designs both for on-track and for wind-tunnel tests, while
realistic situation assessments are scarce. The various instruments adopted for this purpose
were: DAT (Digital Recording Tape) (Harvey et al., 2002; Ross, 1989; Kennedy et al., 2011;
A. Ali et al. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018, 10(3S), 218-231 220
Jordan et al., 2004), SLM (Sound Level Meter) (Carley et al., 2010; Jordan et al., 2004;
Violini et al., 2015), DAQ system (Kennedy et al. 2011)(Kennedy et al. 2013) and multiple
memory noise logging dosimeter (Binnington et al., 1993; McCombe et al., 1993).
Noise measurements inside a motorcycle helmet, while traveling at speeds of up to 120km/h,
is not an easy task (Harvey et al., 2002). Measuring of sound level at various speeds would be
unsafe and on-road data acquisition are problematic due to rider’s safety along with
portability of appropriate instrument. There are no standardized protocols and methods for
measuring the noise under motorcycle helmets (Jordan et al., 2004), while the standard
permissible noise emission level for commuter motorcyclists are also not defined.
Therefore, this study was aimed to investigate the realistic environment motorcycle riding
noise exposure assessment among young riders through personal dosimeter and to calculate
their daily noise exposure level (LAeq, 8h) under three standards: OSHA-HC (Occupational
Safety and Health Administration, Hearing Conservation), OSHA-PEL (Permissible Emission
Level) and ACGIH/NIOSH (American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists/
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health).
MATERIALS AND METHOD
Study population
A field study to assess motorcycling noise under helmet was carried out at Universiti
Teknologi MARA, Puncak Alam campus, Malaysia. The participants were undergraduate
students, aged between 19 to 25 years, who rode the motorcycle as primary means of
transportation. Total participants recruited in the study were 52. Inclusion criteria set for the
study consisted of participants exhibiting helmet-riding behavior and motorcycle capacity
ranging from 100 cc to 150 cc. Study procedure and design was approved by Faculty’s
(Health Sciences) Internal Ethical Committee (600-FSK (PT.5/2)), Universiti Teknologi
Mara, Malaysia.
INSTRUMENTS
At-ear noise exposure level of riders under the helmet during motorcycling was measured by
pocket size dosimeter: 3M Noise ProTM, model: Noisepro DLX, Sound Pro Quest technology.
Sound level calibrator, model: QUEST/Type was used for pre-calibration before each
monitoring session. After the monitoring session, dosimeters were post-calibrated followed
by the transfer of the data into the spreadsheet. Participant’s personal use of motorcycles and
helmets were compensated them with vouchers, which covered fuel consumption and
A. Ali et al. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018, 10(3S), 218-231 221
participation incentive. All participants wore an open-face helmet with the visor closed as
shown in Figure 1a. A structured questionnaire was used to obtain the general demographic
information of the participants (age, semester and gender), data related to motorcycling
(license no, motorcycle registration no, helmet type, motorcycle brand, engine capacity) and
test day information (weather condition, test starting and ending time and date).
Instrument standardization
The dosimeter (shown in Figure 1b) used for assessment had simultaneously three virtual
dosimeters settings, which were calibrated on occupational standards for possible comparison
of noise exposure limits associated with motorcycling. Table 1 presents the three integrators
in the instrument with configuration settings of logging interval of one minute, time-weighted
slow and criterion time 8 hours. The virtual dosimeters first and second were based on the
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) criteria (Gilbertson and Vosburgh,
2015). The first virtual dosimeter was programmed to noise threshold of 80 dBA, criterion
level of 90 dBA, and an exchange rate of 5 dB, which is based on OSHA-HC requirement.
The second virtual dosimeter was programmed without noise threshold, criterion level of 90
dBA and exchange rate of 5 dB, based on OSHA -PEL. The third virtual dosimeter was based
on ACGIH criteria, programmed with 80 dB threshold, 85 dBA criterion level and the
exchange rate of 3 dB (Code of Federal Regulations Title, 29). Threshold defines the point
where the measured decibel levels will not be included in the dosimeters noise level
calculations. Below the threshold value, the decibel levels are replaced with a value of 0 dBA
(Tingay and Robinson, 2014).
Table 1. Configuration of integrators
Integrators 1 2 3
Name OSHA-HC
OSHA-PEL
ACGIH/NIOSH
Exchange Rate 5 5 3
Time Weighting Slow Slow Slow
Frequency Weighting
dB(A) dB(A) dB(A)
Threshold 80 none 80
Criterion Time 8 hrs 8 hrs 8 hrs
Criterion Level 90 90 85
A. Ali et al. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018, 10(3S), 218-231 222
The motorcyclists normalized 8-hr time-weighted average (TWA) noise exposure was
calculated using Equation I for OSHA-HC and OSHA-PEL virtual dosimeter. Equation II was
used to calculate the third virtual dosimeter (ACGIH) which used 3db exchange rate
(Gilbertson and Vosburgh 2015).
(EQ-I)
(EQ-II)
In Equation I, LOSHA,8h is the normalized 8-hr TWA noise exposure and LOSHA, T is the average
noise level (A-weighted) over the time T. In Equation II, LA8hn stands for normalized 8-hr
TWA noise exposure and Leq, T is the average noise level (A-weighted) exposed during the
time period T.
Procedure
Testing route was UiTM, Faculty of Health Sciences bus station (D1) to UiTM Perdana (D2).
Prior to the testing ride from D1 to D2 and return, participants filed the data questionnaire
followed by the installation of dosimeter as shown in Figure 1c. The total distanced covered
from D1-D2-D1 was approximately 40 km and 46 minutes.
Calibrated dosimeter (114 dBA) small microphone (Type 2) was placed near the entrance of
the rider’s ear canal, so as not to be in-contact with any other part of the ear. The microphone
was attached to a clip to hold the wire to prevent movement, while a thin microphone cord
attached to the dosimeter. A wire cord was drawn from the front of the rider and clipped at the
front by placing the dosimeter instrument in the front basket of the motorcycle. The safety of
the dosimeter was ensured by covering it with a front cover. The helmet was fixed and
buckled tightly to avoid any displacement of wires and microphone.
The test road consisted of adjoining roads and highway (flat, asphalt road). The selection of
this road was between the designated D1- D2 route to meet the purpose of assessing real-time
exposure level encountered by the young riders on daily basis during their commute.
Adjoining roads consisted of curves, road bumps, and traffic signals, while the highway was a
straight road. The traffic flow is generally from low to medium, depending on the peak hours
of the day such as morning 7-8 and 5-7pm. The timing of the test administration was flexible,
depending on the availability of the participants. Riders own motorcycles were utilized, which
were without windscreen and ranged from engine capacity of 100 cc to 150 cc. For the safety
A. Ali et al. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018, 10(3S), 218-231 223
reasons, the speed could not be standardized for each kilometre travelled, therefore riders
were instructed to follow the inscribed road speed. All test measurements were carried out in
dry weather condition.
On their arrival, dosimeter data was saved as session number followed by turning it off and
uninstallation of the instrument from the rider. Raw data was later transferred to computer
software i.e. 3M Detection Management Software (DMS) to deliver the measurement of each
session’s report. Data measurement included: Start and stop time, device serial number,
device model type, average A-weighted sound level (LAeq), the exchange rate at 5, dose (daily
personal noise exposure), TWA (time-weighted average), SEL (sound exposure level).
Fig.1. Instruments used for field study: (a) Open-face helmet; (b) Dosimeter and calibrator;
(c) Dosimeter installation on the rider
Statistical Analysis
Dosimeter software generated data was tabulated and logged on excel worksheet, and
statistical analysis was conducted using Statistical Package for Social Sciences, IBM SPSS
(Version 22 Inc., Chicago, IL). Descriptive data of session’s duration, means and standard
deviations and maximum and minimum noise level were computed through frequency chart.
The experimental design consisted of standardized distance travelled but each rider completed
A. Ali et al. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018, 10(3S), 218-231 224
in varied time duration. To normalize the effect of this time difference, 8-hourly time-
weighted average (TWA) noise exposure level was calculated using EQ I and II. The
descriptive statistics for the normalized 8-hr TWA noise exposure were calculated for all the
three virtual dosimeters. The bar charts were plotted for average TWA noise level (dBA)
against three standards.
RESULTS
Table 2 presents the descriptive results of the three virtual dosimeters based on three standard
integrators. The average noise exposure (Lavg) for OSHA-HC was 93.64 d BA (SD=5.37)
ranging from 87.2 to 106.9 d BA. The OSHA-PEL maximum noise exposure was 108.8 d BA
and minimum 83.6 d BA with mean (Lavg) noise exposure of 92.51 d BA (SD = 6.18). The
average noise exposure (Lavg) for ACGIH/NIOSH was 95.29 d BA (SD = 5.62) ranging from
88.8 to 109.8 d BA. The duration of ride ranged between 32 to 61 minutes with mean duration
of 46.98 minutes (SD = 5.84). The 8-hour TWA normalized noise exposures for OSHA-HC,
OSHA-PEL and ACGIH/NIOSH average was 76.82 d BA (SD=5.21; ranging:70.82 - 89.83),
75.69 d BA (SD = 6.03; ranging: 67.03 - 89.74), 85.16 d BA (SD = 5.53; ranging: 78.62-
99.42) respectively. Figure 2 illustrates the comparisons between the three standards average
noise exposure of the participants: (A) OSHA-HC, (B)OSHA-PEL, and (C) ACGIH/NIOSH.
A. Ali et al. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018, 10(3S), 218-231 225
Table 2. Descriptive analysis of average noise exposure and TWA1 on three standards
Dosimeter
Configuration
Mean
(dBA)
SD Range
(dBA)
Lavg (OSHA
HC)
93.64 5.37 106.9-87.2
Lavg (OSHA-
PEL)
92.51 6.18 106.8-
83.6
Lavg
(ACGIH)
95.29 5.62 109.8-88.8
Duration of
ride
46.98 5.84 60-32
8-hr TWA Normalized noise exposure
(OSHA HC) 76.82 5.21 89.83-
70.82
(OSHA-PEL) 75.69 6.03 89.74-
67.03
(ACGIH) 85.16 5.53 99.42-
78.62
A. Ali et al. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018, 10(3S), 218-231 226
Fig.2. Average noise exposure level of participants on different standards: (A) OSHA-HC2;
(B) OSHA-PEL3; (C) ACGIH4
1 TWA: Time-weighted average
2 OSHA-HC: Occupational Safety and Health Administration-Hearing conversation.
3 OSHA-PEL: Permissible Noise Exposure
4 NIOSH: National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health
DISCUSSION
Motorcycling average at-ear noise exposure level of the rider under the open-face helmet in
present study was determined to be above 90 dBA on simultaneously all three virtual
dosimeters which is in accordance with previous studies reported (Kennedy et al., 2011)
either on-track assessment (Carley et al., 2011) or through field study on mannequin road
exposures (Kennedy et al., 2011). The average time taken by the riders (n=52) to complete the
test ride was 46.98 minutes which is in accordance to the google map distance/time
calculation, whereas the minimum time utilized was 32 minutes and maximum 60 minutes
which can be attributed to the difference in riding behaviors of the riders. This study consisted
of a large number of riders, which may reflect the average noise exposure experienced by
A. Ali et al. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018, 10(3S), 218-231 227
motorcyclists through different styles of riding as it has been reported that varying riding
position has different at-ear noise levels to the riders (Carley et al., 2011).
The other factors that influence the noise exposure are different types of helmets used by the
riders, as reported by Ross, 1989 that open face helmets are less noisy with a difference of 7
dB compared to closed-face helmets. Participants in this study wore open-face helmets, but in
case of closed-face helmets the exposure to noise would be much higher than 90 d BA.
It has been also investigated by (Carley et al., 2011) and (Kennedy et al., 2011), that there is a
significant impact of the interaction of helmet with windscreen angle and location on sound
pressure level as well as at-ear noise spectral content. In the current study, the windscreen was
not attached to the participant’s motorcycle.
The studied comparisons on three integrators showed different motorcycle noise exposure
values for a range of different occupational noise exposure standards. The noise exposure in
terms of the sound pressure, to which a rider during the ride would be exposed to, is the same
for all the different integrators. But the average noise level (Lavg) differences between OSHA-
HC (Lavg= 93.64 d BA), OSHA-PEL (Lavg= 92.51 d BA) and ACGIH/NIOSH (Lavg= 95.29 d
BA) demonstrated clearly how a simple variance in the configuration of the integrators can
produce significantly different outcomes. Such differences are attributed to the effects of the
opposing threshold levels, exchange rates, and criterion levels, which combines to provide
different results. The lowest level recorded was 83.6 dBA on OSHA-PEL and the highest
level was recorded at 109.8 dBA on ACGIH/NIOSH standard. This emphasizes the need for
establishing common and standardized measuring protocols for assessing motorcycle noise
exposure levels. The 8-hour TWA average noise exposure above the permissible noise level
was 85.16 dBA for ACGIH/NIOSH standard, which represents a hazardous level for young
riders.
Previous studies related to motorcycle noise measurement did not quote the standards of the
studied measurement, therefore, the present results cannot provide a cross analysis. Realistic
situation based noise assessment has not been conducted with larger sample size, besides the
study conducted by Ross, (1983), where he reported differences in sound levels at same speed
while riding in town and motorway and on open roads, also motorcycling leads to increased
noise exposure in closed-face helmet as compared to open-face helmet. Ross also reported
that wet road exposes higher noise levels than dry roads as assessed by DAT method. All
assessments in this study were conducted under dry weather conditions, but hypothetically it
can be presumed that under wet weather conditions noise exposure levels would be greater
than dry weather results.
A. Ali et al. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018, 10(3S), 218-231 228
Noise level above 80 dBA with continuous exposure over an extended period is referred as a
quantifiable risk of hearing damage (McCombe et al., 1994). The temporary hearing threshold
(THTS) is defined as a loss of hearing sensitivity after noise exposure. THTS recovery to
hearing to pre-exposure level depends on the noise spectral content, age of the person
(listener) and level of exposed noise (Quaranta et al., 1998). Periods of noise exposure cause
the transition of THTS to a permanent hearing threshold shift (PHTS), which is defined as the
characteristics of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL). NIHL may occur from one off-loud
noise exposure such as an explosion, but more commonly it is caused by repeated exposures
to multiple noise doses or continuous loud sounds over a longer period of exposure time, such
as wind noise during motorcycling. The riders noise exposure level is at sufficient level for
developing THTS, but the relevant literature presents inadequate data which has focused
merely on occupational rider’s auditory assessment, whereas, young riders hearing status has
never been investigated. High noise exposures can affect the hearing of such exposed
population that can suffer in hearing sensitivity with the reduction of 30db or more (Kennedy
et al., 2011) and possible distraction (Carley et al., 2010). The hearing ability acts as an early
warning system and swiftly redirects our vision and this gazing shift is critical to assess the
location, direction of travel and speed of approaching vehicles (Brown and Gordon, 2011).
In the literature little work is available on the nature and sources of noise exposed to riders
and its effects other than hearing disabilities, particularly to occupational motorcyclists
(Kennedy et al., 2011). It was shown that high to moderate noise levels hindered reaction
times, impaired attention and reduced perceptual and behavioral response effectiveness
(Brown and Gordon, 2011). It was reported that virtual stimulus paired with an auditory cue
results in more accurate visual perception, increased the risk of accidents and increased level
of stress (young riders)(Perroti et al., 1990; Ali et al., 2016; Ali et al., 2017).
The strength of the study is the larger sample size (participants) and real-time motorcycling
noise exposure assessment on young riders, which has never been investigated. Secondly, it
has provided the baseline of different standards for motorcycling noise exposure levels and
TWA associated with it.
Limitation of this study was non-utilization of other equipment’s such as aerometer and
webcam digital recorder due to safety constraints for assessing the wind speed outside the
helmet and the riders riding position.
A. Ali et al. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018, 10(3S), 218-231 229
CONCLUSION
Findings in this study show that the young motorcycle riders are exposed to noise above the
permissible levels based on 8-hourly TWA ACGIH and NIOSH standard. The average noise
exposure level ranged above 90 d BA under three integrators, which showed high noise
exposure associated with motorcycling among young motorcyclists. The differences among
different standards emphasize the need for established protocols and standards for assessing
the noise exposure associated with motorcyclists. Further studies will embark the risk factors
associated with high noise exposures to the rider’s health.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The study was supported by CORE Shah Alam and Faculty of Health Sciences, UiTM
Selangor, Puncak Alam Campus under Award Numbers 600-RMI/DANA 5/3 LESTARI
(3/2015) and 600-RMI/MYRA 5/3 LESTARI (0016/2016). Special thanks to David Judd and
Farhana Ramli for assembling the participants at the test site and handling the installation of
the dosimeter to the riders.
REFERENCES
Ali, A., Dom, N.C., Hussain, R.M. and Abdullah, M. (2017). Effect of motorcycling on
salivary noise-induced cortisol among young motorcyclists. Environment-Behaviour
Proceedings Journal, 2(6):269–277.
Ali, A., Karuppannan, S., Hussain, R.M., Rajan, S., Abdullah, M., Ikhwan, R. and Chinna, K.
(2016). Epidemiological root cause analysis of noise and physio psycho impacts related to
motorcycle road accidents. Journal of Scientific Research and Development, 3(5), pp.150–
156.
Binnington, J.D., Mccombe, A.W. and Harris, M. (1993). Warning signal detection and the
acoustic environment of the motorcyclist Warning signal detection and the acoustic
environment of the motorcyclist. British Journal of Audiology, 27(6): 415–422.
Brown, C.H. and Gordon, M.S. (2011). Motorcycle Helmet Noise and Active Noise
Reduction. The Open Acoustics Journal, 4(2): 14–24.
Carley, M., Kennedy, J., Walker, I. and Holt, N. (2011). The experimental measurement of
motorcycle noise. In Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics 161ASA, 12(1): 040002.
Carley, M., Holt, N. and Walker, I. (2010). Noise mechanisms in motorcycle helmet noise.
In Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics 159ASA, 9(1): 040005.
Gilbertson, L.R. and Vosburgh, D.J. (2015). Patrol Officer Daily Noise Exposure. Journal of
A. Ali et al. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018, 10(3S), 218-231 230
occupational and environmental hygiene, 12(10): 686-691.
Harvey, H.D., Hetherington, J.O., Woodside, A. and Jordan, C. (2002). Noise induced hearing
loss in motorcyclists. Publication of: Association for European Transport.
Jordan, C., Hetherington, O., Woodside, A. and Harvey, H. (2004). Noise induced hearing
loss in occupational motorcyclists. Journal of Environmental Health Research, 3(2): 70–77.
Kennedy, J., Carley, M., Walker, I. and Holt, N. (2013). On-road and wind-tunnel
measurement of motorcycle helmet noise. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America, 134(3): 2004-2010.
Kennedy, J., Holt, N., Carley, M. and Walker, I. (2011). Spectral filtering characteristics of a
motorcycle helmet. In Proceedings of Meetings on Acoustics 161ASA, 12(1): 040001.
Kennedy, J., Holt, N., Carley, M. and Walker, I. (2014). The influence of the acoustic
properties of motorcycle helmets on temporary hearing loss in motorcyclists. Acta Acustica
united with Acustica, 100(6): 1129-1138.
McCombe, A.W., Binnington, J. and McCombe, T.S. (1993). Hearing protection for
motorcyclists. Clinical Otolaryngology, 18(6): 465-469.
McCombe, A.W., Binnington, J. and Nash, D. (1994). Two solutions to the problem of noise
exposure for motorcyclists. Occupational medicine, 44(5): 239-242.
Occupational Noise Exposure, Code of Federal Regulations Title 29, P. 1910. 9. subpart G.
Perrott, D.R., Saberi, K., Brown, K. and Strybel, T.Z. (1990). Auditory psychomotor
coordination and visual search performance. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 48(3):
214-226.
Quaranta, A., Portalatini, P. and Henderson, D. (1998). Temporary and permanent threshold
shift: an overview. Scandinavian audiology. Supplementum, 48: 75-86.
Ross, B.C. (1989). Noise exposure of motorcyclists. Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 33(1):
123–127.
Tingay, J. and Robinson, D. (2014). A practical comparison of occupational noise standards.
In INTER-NOISE and NOISE-CON Congress and Conference Proceedings, 249(5): 2600-
2607.
Violini, D.G., Peña, R.S.S. and Velis, A. (2015). Time-varying noise control in motorcycle
helmets. Acoustical Science and Technology, 36(4): 333-335.
A. Ali et al. J Fundam Appl Sci. 2018, 10(3S), 218-231 231
How to cite this article:
Ali A, Hussain R M, Abdullah M, Dom N C. At-ear noise levels under the helmet: a field
study on noise exposure of young motorcyclists. J. Fundam. Appl. Sci., 2018, 10(3S), 218-
231.
... Mental alertness and physio-psycho coordination can be affected by noise exposure. On the road, the long-term motorcycle riders are exposed to high intensity noise (> 90 dBA) on a daily basis [24]; [25]; [26]. They are exposed to traffic noise, in addition, wind flow around their helmet generate noise above 90 dBA [27]. ...
Article
Full-text available
Motorcyclists (n=26) average noise exposure levels (LAeq) were found substantially different for OSHA-HC (85 dBA), OSHA-PEL (78 dBA) and ACGIH/NIOSH (87 dBA) noise standards. A significant difference in LAeq, (p=.027) and engine capacity usage (p=.045) was found amongst gender. However, no observable association was found between the LAeq and motorcycle engine capacity (p= .462) and completion of a ride (p= .695). Thus, female riders were inclined to use lower motorcycle capacities, rode at lower speeds which resulted in lower noise exposure levels, in concurrence with longer ride durations. Overall, motorcyclists’ noise exposure level functions with the increasing speed (80km/h: 88 dBA). Keywords: Motorcycle noise; Dosimeter; Speed; Noise standards eISSN: 2398-4287© 2020. The Authors. Published for AMER ABRA cE-Bs by e-International Publishing House, Ltd., UK. This is an open access article under the CC BYNC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer–review under responsibility of AMER (Association of Malaysian Environment-Behaviour Researchers), ABRA (Association of Behavioural Researchers on Asians) and cE-Bs (Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21834/ebpj.v5i15.2455.
Article
Full-text available
Young motorcyclists are exposed to high noise exposure which can affect their cognitive function. This study was designed to evaluate the cognitive function of undergraduate University students (aged: 19-25) which ride a motorcycle as a primary mode of transportation. Total of 60 motorcyclists participated which were divided into two groups: an experimental group which performed neuropsychological battery test under motorcycle noise (≤90 dBA) and control group under controlled laboratory noise (≤65 dBA). The result showed significantly better cognitive performance (p < 0.05) of a control group. The results demonstrated that motorcycle noise significantly decreased the cognitive performance of the experimental group (p < 0.05).Keywords: Motorcycle noise; Motorcyclists; Neuropsychological assessment; Reaction-timeeISSN 2398-4295 © 2019. The Authors. Published for AMER ABRA cE-Bs by e-International Publishing House, Ltd., UK. This is an open-access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Peer–review under responsibility of AMER (Association of Malaysian Environment-Behaviour Researchers), ABRA (Association of Behavioural Researchers on Asians) and cE-Bs (Centre for Environment-Behaviour Studies), Faculty of Architecture, Planning & Surveying, Universiti Teknologi MARA, Malaysia. http://dx.doi.org/10.21834/ajbes.v4i15.168
Article
Full-text available
Saliva cortisol response was investigated from the motorcycling exposure for approximately 50 minutes between low and high noise-sensitive (Weinstein Noise Sensitivity Scale) young riders (19-25 years). The results showed significant difference (p < 0.05) in salivary cortisol concentrations in High-Noise Sensitive group (n = 27). Significant gender differences were found (p < 0.05) among the Low-Noise sensitive group (n = 30), after ride. Cross-analysis between groups was significant (p < 0.05) for before ride cortisol levels of Low-Noise sensitive group. This study suggests that subjective noise sensitivity plays a vital role in increased cortisol level among noise sensitive riders.
Article
Full-text available
The active noise control problem in motorcycle helmets is studied, which has an intrinsic time-varying behavior. The time-varying approach is designed to have an attenuation level that increases with the speed between the helmet and the air using a linear parameter-varying (LPV) controller. To achieve a reasonable noise attenuation, the noise source and its dynamic characteristics are computed. Three different experiments were performed, an experiment on the noise dynamics, identification tests and an experiment on controller implementation. The identification tests were carried out using six sinusoidal sweeps as system excitation signals. Between each sweep, the system was perturbed to include various practical situations. Regardless of the attenuation results, the alternative of having a controller that changes its performance as a function of the helmet speed is attractive.
Article
Full-text available
Noise is an unavoidable component of motorcycling. The noise sources are varied, and include the helmet itself which also filters the noise passing through it. Here helmet noise transmission characteristics have been analyzed using insertion loss measurements and loudness matching in a behavioural study. Results demonstrate the action of the helmet as a spectral filter and confirm previously published data showing attenuation in the frequency range above 500 Hz. Highlighted here for the first time is an amplification of noise below 500 Hz. The loudness matching task data allowed the generation of equiloudness functions which show the effect of the helmet on riders' perceptions of loudness. The generated curves are here compared to the relevant international standard (ISO226) and show that loudness was strongly influenced by the helmet. The noise experienced by a motorcycle rider on a 30 minute journey can result in a temporary hearing threshold shift of over 15 dB. Due to the filtering characteristics of the helmet this threshold shift is highly frequency dependent. To quantify the frequency dependence of the resulting temporary hearing threshold shift pure tone audiometry was conducted before and after exposure to white noise, with and without a helmet in a laboratory setting and after on-road noise exposure. Of particular note is the finding of increased hearing sensitivity at high frequencies following certain type of motorcycle noise exposure. The difference is discussed in the framework of the filtering characteristics of the helmet.
Article
Full-text available
The incidence of collisions between motorcyclists and other vehicles may be significantly reduced by research that improves the acoustic awareness of cyclists, and thus heightens the ability of cyclists to respond to unexpected incursions from the surrounding traffic. We use our hearing as an early warning system, and hearing swiftly redirects our vision and attention. This shift in gaze is critical to our capacity to assess the location, direction of travel, and velocity of approaching vehicles. The present study was composed of two experiments. In the first experiment a Neumann KU-100 dummy head with embedded binaural microphones was used to measure noise levels in a motorcycle helmet as a function of velocity. Noise levels were measured in two helmets, one with active noise reduction technology, and one without. The results showed that noise levels exceeded 100 dB (A) at highway speeds in the absence of noise reduction technology. The helmet with active noise control ear muffs was able to attenuate helmet noise by up to 26 dB. Active noise control technology shows great promise for noise reduction for the motorcycle helmet industry, and the development of "quiet" helmets is important for both hearing conservation and highway safety. The second experiment surveyed subjective perceptions of helmet noise by motorcyclists. The results from the present sample showed that 92.1% of the respondents objected to the high noise levels associated with cycling, 63.5 % wore earplugs, 46.8% reported tinnitus, and 95.2% wanted a quieter helmet.
Article
Previous research shows that police officers are at a higher risk for noise induced hearing loss (NIHL). Little data exists on the occupational tasks, outside of the firing range, that might lead to the increased risk of NIHL. The current study collected noise dosimetry from patrol officers in a smaller department and a larger department in southern Wisconsin, United States. The noise dosimeters simultaneously measured noise in three virtual dosimeters that had different thresholds, criterion levels, and exchange rates. The virtual dosimeters were set to: the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) hearing conservation criteria (OSHA-HC), the OSHA permissible exposure level criteria (OSHA-PEL), and the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH). In addition to wearing a noise dosimeter during their respective work days, officers completed a log form documenting the type of task performed, the duration of that task, if the task involved the use of a siren, and officer characteristics that may have influenced their noise exposure, such as the type of dispatch radio unit worn. Analysis revealed that the normalized 8-hour time weighted averages (TWA) for all officers fell below the recommended OSHA and ACGIH exposure limits. The tasks involving the use of the siren had significantly higher levels than the tasks without (p=0.005). The highest noise exposure levels were encountered when patrol officers were assisting other public safety agencies such as a fire department or emergency medical services (79 dBA). Canine officers had higher normalized 8-hour TWA noise exposure than regular patrol officers (p=0.002). Officers with an evening work schedule had significantly higher noise exposure than the officers with a day or night work schedule (p=0.023). There were no significant differences in exposure levels between the two departments (p=0.22). Results suggest that this study population is unlikely to experience NIHL as established by the OSHA or ACGIH occupational exposure levels from the daily occupational tasks that were monitored.
Article
The noise source mechanisms involved in motorcycling include various aerodynamic sources and engine noise. The problem of noise source identification requires extensive data acquisition of a type and level that have not previously been applied. Data acquisition on track and on road are problematic due to rider safety constraints and the portability of appropriate instrumentation. One way to address this problem is the use of data from wind tunnel tests. The validity of these measurements for noise source identification must first be demonstrated. In order to achieve this extensive wind tunnel tests have been conducted and compared with the results from on-track measurements. Sound pressure levels as a function of speed were compared between on track and wind tunnel tests and were found to be comparable. Spectral conditioning techniques were applied to separate engine and wind tunnel noise from aerodynamic noise and showed that the aerodynamic components were equivalent in both cases. The spectral conditioning of on-track data showed that the contribution of engine noise to the overall noise is a function of speed and is more significant than had previously been thought. These procedures form a basis for accurate experimental measurements of motorcycle noise.
Article
Temporary threshold shift (TTS) as well as permanent threshold shift (PTS) represent the most common hearing effect of acute and chronic high level acoustic stimulation. TTS is typically related to the traumatizing stimulus spectrum and to the exposure level and duration. The stapedial acoustic reflex as well as the repetition rate of the exposure may influence TTS. PTS is related to a number of factors including exposure duration, subject's age, exposure to other ototoxic factors, presence of impulse noise components, etc. PTS is usually accompanied with alterations of several cochlear functions leading to altered speech discrimination mostly in presence of background noise. The main characteristics of both TTS and PTS are reviewed and discussed.
Article
In Experiments 1 and 2, the time to locate and identify a visual target (visual search performance in a two-alternative forced-choice paradigm) was measured as a function of the location of the target relative to the subject's initial line of gaze. In Experiment 1, tests were conducted within a 260 degree region on the horizontal plane at a fixed elevation (eye level). In Experiment 2, the position of the target was varied in both the horizontal (260 degrees) and the vertical (+/- 46 degrees from the initial line of gaze) planes. In both experiments, and for all locations tested, the time required to conduct a visual search was reduced substantially (175-1,200 msec) when a 10-Hz click train was presented from the same location as that occupied by the visual target. Significant differences in latencies were still evident when the visual target was located within 10 degrees of the initial line of gaze (central visual field). In Experiment 3, we examined head and eye movements that occur as subjects attempt to locate a sound source. Concurrent movements of the head and eyes are commonly encountered during auditorily directed search behavior. In over half of the trials, eyelid closures were apparent as the subjects attempted to orient themselves toward the sound source. The results from these experiments support the hypothesis that the auditory spatial channel has a significant role in regulating visual gaze.