• 동력기계공학회지
• /
• 제3권3호
• /
• pp.97-103
• /
• 1999

As the noise of ship engine room is too loud, the engineer who works in a ship engine-room has the trouble of hearing. In this paper deals the investigation of the noise of ship engine room and cabins with the internationally allowable noise exposure level and noise exposure time. Recently, the problem of engine-room noise is more serious because of shipowner wants to make small number and larger size of cylinder. Therefore, engineers work in a ship engine-room for a long time have the trouble of hearing when they are exposed the high noise level. In this study, two kinds of vessels were used to investigate the noise of engine room, engine-control room, bridge, offices and cabins. As criteria of sound levels, A-weighted sound pressure level and octave band pressure level were used.

• 한국산업보건학회지
• /
• 제25권4호
• /
• pp.573-583
• /
• 2015

Objectives: This study was carried out to evaluate the effect of noise exposure and aging on changes in hearing threshold level and the relationship between age and noise. Materials: The author selected 274 male shipyard and assembly line workers as the noise exposed group and 582 males not exposed to noise as the general population group. Data were collected from five years of consecutive annual audiometric tests performed from 2008 to 2012. Results: In the general population and noise exposed groups, there was a reverse phenomenon that hearing threshold level for 2009 was lower than that of 2008, which seemed to be due to the learning effect, but from 2010 hearing threshold level increased. In the noise exposed group, the mean hearing threshold level in the left ear was significantly higher than that for right ear. In the general population group, the older was the age, the higher was the hearing threshold level, especially at 4000 Hz. In the general population and noise exposed groups, frequency, age group and noise exposure independently affected hearing threshold level, and there was no relationship between age and noise exposure. Over all frequencies, the change of hearing threshold level was larger in the noise exposed group than in the general population group. In the noise exposed group below thirty years old, the change at 4000 Hz was remarkable. Conclusions: Age and noise exposure seem to affect hearing threshold level independently and contribute to an additive effect on hearing threshold level.

• 한국소음진동공학회논문집
• /
• 제23권9호
• /
• pp.831-840
• /
• 2013

The noise levels of workers in tunnel sites are likely to be high because tunneling work places are confined space. However, research on the noise exposure levels of tunneling workers have not been performed intensively due to restricted accessibility to tunnel construction sites. The aim of this study is to evaluate the noise exposure levels for workers engaged in tunneling work sites. Noise dosimeters were used for monitoring workers' noise exposure level in 5 tunneling work sites in accordance with the Notification of the Ministry of Labor. Among 5 tunneling work sites, 4 of them used NATM tunneling method and 1 work site used shield TBM tunneling method. The average noise exposure levels of NATM tunneling workers was 81.1 dB(A) and 15.4 % of the workers' noise level were exposed more than 90 dB(A) which is the exposure limit value. In Shield TBM tunneling method, 4.3 % of the workers were exposed more than 90 dB(A) of noise level, the average noise exposure levels of TBM tunneling workers was 84.1 dB(A).

• 한국산업보건학회지
• /
• 제5권2호
• /
• pp.128-136
• /
• 1995

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the difference of noise level according to noise measuring methods in the noisy working environments. Sound pressure level(SPL), equivalence sound level(Leq) and personal noise exposure dose(Dose) in the fifty-nine unit workplaces of the twenty-eight industries were measured and relating factors which were affected noise level were investigated. The results were as follows ; 1. The noise levels were $88.70{\pm}5.68dB(A)$ by SPL, $89.07{\pm}5.41dB(A)$ by Leq and $89.07{\pm}5.69$ by Dose. The differences of noise levels by three measuring methods were statistically significant(P<0.001) by repeated measure ANOV A. 2. Comparing with noise levels by general classes of noise exposure, noise levels of continuous noise were $89.14{\pm}5.19dB(A)$ by SPL, $89.45{\pm}4.65dB(A)$ by Leq and $90.04{\pm}5.09$ by Dose. Noise levels of intermittent noise were $87.90{\pm}6.52dB(A)$ by SPL, $88.40{\pm}6.63dB(A)$ by Leq and $90.10{\pm}6.80$ by Dose. The differences noise level of noise measuring methods by general classese of noise exposure were statistically not significant by repeated measure ANOV A. 3. Interaction between general classese of noise exposure and noise measuring methods for noise level was not statistically significant by repeated measure ANOVA. And the noise level by noise measuring methods were statistically significant by repeated measure ANOV A(P<.001) 4. Comparing with noise levels by unit workplace size, noise levels of large unit workplace were $90.73{\pm}5.87dB(A)$ by SPL, $91.32{\pm}5.50dB(A)$ by Leq and $91.82{\pm}6.06$ by Dose and noise levels of middle unit workplace were $88.31{\pm}5.26dB(A)$ by SPL, $88.41{\pm}4.83dB(A)$ by Leq and $89.69{\pm}5.05$ by Dose. And noise levels of small unit workplace were $94.89{\pm}4.10dB(A)$ by SPL, $85.35{\pm}4.11dB(A)$ by Leq and $86.87{\pm}4.98$ by Dose. The noise level differences of noise measuring methods by unit workplace size were statistically significant by repeated measure ANOV A(P<.05). 5. The noise level by noise measuring methods were statistically significant by repeated measure ANOV A(P<.001). But Interaction between workplace size and noise level measuring methods for noise level was not statistically significant by repeated measure ANOVA. According to the above results, there was a difference of the noise level among the three measuring methods. Therefore we must use the personal noise exposure dose using by noise dose meter, possible, to prvent occupational hearing loss in noisy working environment.

• 한국소음진동공학회논문집
• /
• 제21권5호
• /
• pp.400-407
• /
• 2011

The suggested method of previous Son's study dichotomized subjective response data to modeling noise exposure-response. The method used maximum liklihood estimation instead of least square estimation and the noise exposure-response curve of the study was logistic regression analysis result. The method was originated to modeling community response rate such as %HA or %A. It can be useful when the subjective response was investigated based on predicted noise level. It is difficult to measure the single source emitting noise such as railway because various traffic noise sources combined in our life. The suggested method was adopted to model in this study and railway noise-exposure response curves were modeled because the noise level of this area was predicted data. The data of this study was used by previous Ko's paper but he dealt the area as combined noise area and divided the data by dominant noise source. But this study used all data of this area because the annoyance response to railway noise was higher than other noise according to the result of correlation analysis. The trend of the %HA and %A prediction model to train noise of this study is almost same as the model based on measured noise of previous Lim's study although the investigated areas and methods were different.

• 한국산업보건학회지
• /
• 제30권2호
• /
• pp.185-195
• /
• 2020

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to analyze noise exposure levels and the rate of exceedance of exposure limits in workplaces from a 2015 measurement of working environments according to area, industry, and scale of workplace and to determine changes compared to the past. Methods: Among the 408,875 measurements of noise in working environments from 27,030 workplaces in 2015, 16,359 workplaces that were linked to special health examination data were selected as the subjects of this study. The eight-hour corrected measurements and geometric mean values of the individual noise measurements of the workplaces were used to calculate noise exposure levels and the exceedance rate of exposure limits. Results: The average noise exposure level of the overall workplaces making up the subjects of this study was 83.6 dBA, and the exceedance rate of exposure limits was 15.1%. At least half of the noise measurements exceeded the exposure limits in 13.7% of the workplaces. Noise exposure levels were higher in the manufacturing industry and in smaller-scale workplaces. The exceedance rate of noise exposure limits was higher in the mining and manufacturing industries and in smaller-scale workplaces. Conclusions: Noise exposure has shown improvements compared to the past, but the exceedance rate of exposure limits was still high, and more than half of the workers were being exposed to noise of 85 dBA or higher. Therefore, it is necessary to make more active improvements in working environments in terms of noise exposure.

• 한국환경보건학회지
• /
• 제45권6호
• /
• pp.569-576
• /
• 2019

Objectives: The main purpose of this study was to assess firefighters' daily personal noise exposure and explore noise levels related to specific tasks and their contributions to total noise exposure using 24-hour full-shift noise exposure measurements with task-based data. Methods: Noise exposure was assessed for eight firefighters (two rescuers, two drivers, and four suppressors) using time-activity diaries. We collected a total of 24 full-shift personal noise sample sets (three samples per a firefighter). The 24-hour shift-adjusted daily personal noise exposure level (L_ep,d), eight weekly personal noise exposures (L_eq,w), and 40 task-specific L_eq values (L_{eq activity}) were calculated via the ISO/NIOSH method. Results: The firefighter noise-sample datasets showed that most firefighters are exposed to noise levels above EU recommended levels at a low-action value. The highest noise exposure was for rescuers, followed by drivers and suppressors. Noise measurements with time-at-task information revealed that 82.3% of noise exposure occurred when checking equipment and responding to fire or emergency calls. Conclusions: The results indicate that firefighters are at risk of noise-induced hearing loss. Therefore, efforts at noise-control are necessary for their protection. This task-specific noise exposure assessment also shows that protective measures should be focused on certain tasks, such as checking and testing equipment.

• 한국소음진동공학회논문집
• /
• 제22권3호
• /
• pp.264-274
• /
• 2012

Evaluation on the environmental noise is carried out by surveying subjective response of residents with physical measurement of noise during long period in field. Particularly field survey is used to make regulations from the analysis on how many people are annoyed for specific noise level, and laboratory test used to analyze the relationship between physical parameters of noise and subjective responses. In the laboratory controlling the variables is easy but the results could be biased because the condition in room would be different with field. Most of all noise exposure time is considered to be different with real situation, and this study aimed to evaluate the subjective response by exposure time of transportation noise, by applying three kinds of variable how much they give effects on the annoyance as the exposure time is operating condition, windows type and sound level. As a result there was somewhat difference between operating type and annoyance, which is caused by the sound characteristics operated in different condition. However the window type didn't give much effect to the annoyance as much as sound type. This means that the subjective response could give similar result by exposure time even for different window types. Most of all, the main factor affecting subjective response is considered to be the sound level and the exposure time.

• 한국산업보건학회지
• /
• 제23권3호
• /
• pp.261-265
• /
• 2013

The purpose of this study was to evaluate noise level exposures at different locations such as the left and right ears of the shooter, control room, waiting soldier location and drill ground. For this study, we visited two military rifle ranges and took measurements with a sound level meter (3M Quest SoundPro TM) at five different locations with values of Peak (dB(A)) and Max (dB(A)). The highest peak value of impulse noise level averaged 150.4 dB(A), ranging from 149.6 to 150.5 dB(A) at both the left and right ear sides. This result was significantly different between both left and right ear side locations and at other locations such as the control room, waiting soldier location, and drill ground (P < 0.001). Frequency of impulse noise exposure level showed that the left ear of shooter had the highest frequency (20 times) at over 150 dB(A). This study confirmed that there is a need for proper controls to reduce the amount of impulse noise exposure at military rifle ranges.

• 한국소음진동공학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국소음진동공학회 2011년도 춘계학술대회 논문집
• /
• pp.808-813
• /
• 2011

There are hundreds of thousands call center workers wearing acoustic device. However, researches and noise exposure measurements on the noise transmitted from acoustic devices have seldom been performed due to the difficulty of measurement and to the absence of the measuring method in Korea. The aim of this study is to set up management measures to protect hearing loss on the call operator by acquiring measurement data of noise transmitted from the headset Noise exposure measurements of 17 operators were performed in 7 call centers and Head and Torso Simulator method in compliance with the ISO Standard 11904-2 was used for the measurement of noise transmitted from the headset Sound pressure levels(SPL) transmitted from the headset were 73.2~86 dB(A). The operator exposed to the highest SPL set up his volume control at 9 which was the highest volume level. The volume control level, adjustable from 1 to 9, could be identified 12 out of 17 operators and the range of volume levels was 4.5~9. As a result of Pearson Correlation Analysis, the correlation between volume level and SPL transmitted from the headset showed high relation as significance at the 0.672 level(p<0.05). To protect hearing loss of call center operators, it is more practical and effective measure to limit the volume level below the noise exposure level, i.e. 85 dB(A), rather than to carry out noise monitoring considering cost-effective aspect.