Differential effects of suppressors on hazardous sound pressure levels generated by AR-15 rifles: Considerations for recreational shooters, law enforcement, and the military

@article{Lobarinas2016DifferentialEO,
  title={Differential effects of suppressors on hazardous sound pressure levels generated by AR-15 rifles: Considerations for recreational shooters, law enforcement, and the military},
  author={Edward Lobarinas and Ryan Scott and Christopher Spankovich and Colleen G. Le Prell},
  journal={International Journal of Audiology},
  year={2016},
  volume={55},
  pages={S59 - S71}
}
Abstract Objective: Firearm discharges produce hazardous levels of impulse noise that can lead to permanent hearing loss. In the present study, we evaluated the effects of suppression, ammunition, and barrel length on AR-15 rifles. Design: Sound levels were measured left/right of a user’s head, and 1-m left of the muzzle, per MIL-STD-1474-D, under both unsuppressed and suppressed conditions. Study sample: Nine commercially available AR-15 rifles and 14 suppressors were used. Results… Expand
The reduction of gunshot noise and auditory risk through the use of firearm suppressors and low-velocity ammunition
TLDR
Firearm suppressors may reduce noise exposure, and the cumulative exposures of suppressed firearms can still present a significant hearing risk, therefore, firearm users should always wear hearing protection whenever target shooting or hunting. Expand
Noise reduction at the shooting range by means of level-dependent hearing protectors.
TLDR
Level-dependent hearing protectors constitute the appropriate means to protect the hearing of people at a shooting range, while maintaining the functionality of these protection devices to transmit speech signals. Expand
Prevention of Noise-Induced Hearing Loss from Recreational Firearms.
TLDR
Several factors that influence the risk of NIHL are described including the use of a muzzle brake, the number of shots fired, the distance between shooters, the shooting environment, the choice of ammunition, theUse of a suppressor, and hearing protection fit and use. Expand
Selection of Level-Dependent Hearing Protectors for Use in An Indoor Shooting Range
TLDR
Depending on the assessment criterion adopted, a sufficient reduction in impulse noise was provided by either four or six out of the 10 hearing protectors included in the study. Expand
A Pilot Study of Law Enforcement Officer Perceptions of Noise Induced Hearing Loss
Noise Induced Hearing Loss (NIHL) is an effect on an individual’s hearing due to exposure to excessive noise that results in a particular form of hearing loss, most frequently recognized by theExpand
Effects of Sound Suppressors on Muzzle Velocity, Bullet Yaw, and Drag
Little has been published regarding whether and how sound suppressors impact bullet flight, including velocity, bullet yaw, and drag. These parameters were compared for four different bullets firedExpand
Force and Sound Pressure Sensors Used for Modeling the Impact of the Firearm with a Suppressor
TLDR
A mathematical model for projectiles shooting in any direction based on sensors distributed stereoscopically is put forward, based on the characteristics of a shock wave around a supersonic projectile and acoustical localization, which shows an increase in silencers chamber volume results in a reduction of recorded pressure within the silencer chamber. Expand
Effects of noise on speech recognition: Challenges for communication by service members
TLDR
An overview of the challenges associated with speech communication in noisy backgrounds, as well as its assessment and potential impact on functional performance, is provided and guidance for important new research directions is provided. Expand
1 NHCA POSITION STATEMENT Recreational Firearm Noise March 16 , 2017
Recreational firearm use is a popular leisure-time activity in the United States enjoyed by millions of individuals across all age groups. Recreational firearms produce impulse noise levels thatExpand
Toward an improved hearing safety standard for impulse noise exposure in the Canadian Armed Forces
Introduction: Current hearing safety standards for the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) do not adequately address exposure limits for mitigation of noise-induced hearing loss (NIHL) from weapon noise. R...
...
1
2
...

References

SHOWING 1-10 OF 31 REFERENCES
Azimuthal auditory localization of gunshots in a realistic field environment: Effects of open-ear versus hearing protection-enhancement devices (HPEDs), military vehicle noise, and hearing impairment
TLDR
None of the tested HPEDs preserved “normal” localization performance, and subjective ratings related to localization generally corroborated objective localization performance. Expand
Comparison of Muzzle Suppression and Ear-Level Hearing Protection in Firearm Use
  • M. Branch
  • Medicine
  • Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery
  • 2011
TLDR
Noise reduction of all ear-level protectors is unable to reduce the impulse pressure below 140 dB for certain common firearms, an international standard for prevention of sensorineural hearing loss. Expand
Noise attenuation of communication hearing protectors against impulses from assault rifle.
TLDR
Communication hearing protectors seem to function and attenuate sufficiently against the peak levels of the impulse noises used in this study. Expand
Assessment of Noise Exposure for Indoor and Outdoor Firing Ranges
  • W. Murphy, R. Tubbs
  • Engineering, Medicine
  • Journal of occupational and environmental hygiene
  • 2007
TLDR
Noise sampling revealed that the peak sound pressure levels for the various weapons ranged from 156 to 170 decibels (dB SPL), which are greater than the recommended allowable 140 dB SPL exposure guideline from NIOSH. Expand
Protection efficiency of hearing protectors against military noise from handheld weapons and vehicles.
TLDR
Commercial and military versions of earmuff noise attenuation were measured against rifle noise, and the best protection for soldiers seems to be active noise cancellation ear muffs that are equipped for communication purposes and worn during the entire military exercise. Expand
Noise attenuation of hearing protectors against heavy weapon noise.
TLDR
If the limit for the C-weighted peak level is 140 dB for unprotected ears, then protection against low-frequency noise is provided by earplugs, up to 150 dB by earmuffs, and up to 165 dB by the combined use of plugs and muffs. Expand
Measurement of impulse peak insertion loss for four hearing protection devices in field conditions
TLDR
The EPA's proposed methods provide consistent and reproducible results and should utilize the minimum and maximum protection percentiles as determined by the ANSI S12.42-2010 methods. Expand
[Evaluation of the risk on hearing loss at soldiers].
TLDR
Estimated exposure to weapons noise may prevent soldiers before hearing loss, and difference between groups is dependent on kind of military service. Expand
Estimates of auditory risk from outdoor impulse noise. II: Civilian firearms.
TLDR
Vast differences in maximum permissible exposures were observed; the rank order of the differences varied with the source of the impulse, and people electing to fire a gun without hearing protection should be advised to minimize auditory risk through careful selection of ammunition and shooting environment. Expand
A field investigation of hearing protection and hearing enhancement in one device: for soldiers whose ears and lives depend upon it.
TLDR
In-field research was conducted to examine operational performance effects of three different hearing enhancement protection systems (HEPS) that are intended to provide both protection and audibility, demonstrating that more development is needed to achieve the levels of hearing performance and user acceptance from the HEPS that is desirable and needed for combat conditions. Expand
...
1
2
3
4
...