PROTECTING EYES & EARS
day, in different areas, in different ways, all of which can have an effect on their overall exposure level. The benefit of using a noise dosimeter is that it allows the worker to continue with their day-to-day tasks, enabling the assessor to gather a truly representative work day sample.
Another tool has also come to the forefront as a useful aid for occupational hygienists or those responsible for health and safety and that is the smartphone. More and more assessors are using their phones or tablets to make field notes and add photos to what would otherwise be a set of ‘raw’ values. The benefit of this is that it creates context for the data and provides an additional level of accuracy, giving the assessor a better overall picture of an individual’s personal exposure, leading to more effective controls.
The latest noise dosimeters are designed to communicate wirelessly with smartphones and tablets: seamlessly aligning noise data with contextual information, making reporting easier. In a world where smartwatches are the latest technology fad, adding connectivity to noise dosimeters is far from innovation for innovation’s sake.
By allowing the assessor to control the device from a distance and detailing when battery life, for example, is dwindling, the wearer will be disturbed far less during their tasks and the assessor will be more productive. Wearer compliance has also historically been a challenge, with the worst case being the wearer taking their device off during the course of their shift, producing unreliable data. The latest noise dosimeters include motion sensors to tell the assessor if the device was indeed worn, helping to validate the data collected.
With the right tools at hand there are three important measurements that form the basis of a risk assessment. The first is ‘LAeq(T)’, which is the average amount of noise over a specified time (T). The second is ‘Lex8h’, which is the normalised exposure based on a typical eight hour working day. And finally, ‘LCpk’, is a measure of short-duration impulse/ impact or peak (pk) sound to which a
40
worker is exposed, which can give rise to instantaneous damage to hearing such as a ruptured eardrum.
Once the risk assessment has been completed, there are also three main levels of exposure – each requiring different interventions – to consider. The lower exposure action value is a daily (Lex8h) or weekly average noise exposure level of 80 dB(A), with a peak value of 135 dB(C). Here, employers must provide information and training as well as making hearing protection available, with risk assessments conducted at least every two years.
At the upper exposure value of 85 dB(A) (with a peak value of 137 dB(C)), employers must take measures to reduce noise exposure, including making hearing protection mandatory; considering other measures such as noise control of machinery; and clearly marking an area as a noise hazard zone. The exposure limit value is 87 dB(A) – no
employee can be exposed to these levels or higher, although hearing protection is taken into account. However, if exposure is above 95 dB, an octave band frequency analysis must be used to check that the hearing protection is effective, assuming of course that it is also worn for the whole exposure time.
With the right data to hand effective control measures can be put in place to prevent NIHL from dominating the league table of the biggest causes of occupational disease once again. However, the seriousness of noise issues must first be appreciated by employers. Health has long taken second place to safety as a business priority as the effects were perhaps deemed to be less immediate. This tide is slowly turning – as more data is gathered the realities of overexposure to noise are increasingly demonstrated.
www.casellasolutions.com www.tomorrowshs.com
“A KEY PART OF A RISK ASSESSMENT IS HAVING THE RIGHT DATA, WHICH SHOULD ALSO BE THE BASIS OF ANY DECISION ON CONTROL.”
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54