Factors Affecting Farm Noise During Common Agricultural Activities

Franklin, Richard C.; Depczynski, Julie; Challinor, Kathy; Williams, Warwick; Fragar, Lyn

doi:10.13031/2013.20388

Cited by 16 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Vibration, as well as noise levels, during driving between different wood piles in the forest was higher in the tractormounted variants than in truck-mounted ones. Similar findings have been reported by various authors (Kumar 2004;Franklin et al 2006;Pitts 2007;Scarlett et al 2007;Scarlett et al 2009;Nitti and De Santis 2010;Smets et al 2010;Bilski 2013), not for chippers but for agricultural tractors and trucks used in off-road transport.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

“…Exposure of forest workers to noise during forest operations has been the subject of investigation during different types of equipment, such as chainsaws (Humann et al 2012), harvesters and/or forwarders (Ljungberg and Neely 2007;Gerasimov and Sokolov 2013) and tractors (Franklin et al 2006;Bilski 2013). However, no studies report values of noise exposure during the chipping process.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Vibration and noise assessment of tractor-trailer and truck-mounted chippers

Rottensteiner¹,

Tsioras²,

Neumayer³

et al. 2013

Silva Fenn.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Vibration and noise assessment of tractor-trailer and truck-mounted chippersRottensteiner C., Tsioras P., Neumayer H., Stampfer K. (2013). Vibration and noise assessment of tractor-trailer and truck-mounted chippers. Silva Fennica vol. 47 no. 5 article id 984. 14 p. Highlights• Truck-mounted chippers were associated with higher vibration values, while tractor-trailer chippers had higher noise level. • Chipping hardwood produced higher vibration magnitudes than softwood.• Vibration and noise values in most cases did not exceed the exposure limit values set by the European Union. AbstractDuring chipping, machine operators are exposed to whole-body vibration and noise bearing a risk to health. Vibration on the operator's seat and noise inside the chipper cab was measured and analyzed. The factorial design considered two setup variants (tractor-trailer and truck-mounted) of two chipper models from different manufacturers during chipping of softwood and hardwood tree species. Furthermore, exposure to noise was measured during chipping of hardwood. Vibration and noise during chipping, driving between wood piles, and operational delays were measured separately. The results associated truck-mounted chippers with higher vibration values and tractortrailer chippers with higher noise levels. The highest vibration levels were recorded while driving on the forest road from one log pile to another and the second highest during chipping. On the contrary, the lowest vibration levels were measured during operational delays with the chipper in idling condition. Chipping hardwood produced higher vibration magnitudes than softwood. Exposure to noise was significantly higher during chipping compared to driving and operational delays. Vibration and noise data were combined with time studies data, for the calculation of eight-hour energy equivalent total values, both for vibration and noise. In all cases, the exposure limit values set by the European Union were not exceeded, with the exception of truck-mounted chippers, which are likely to exceed the exposure action value for vibration.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 89%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vibration and noise assessment of tractor-trailer and truck-mounted chippers

Rottensteiner¹,

Tsioras²,

Neumayer³

et al. 2013

Silva Fenn.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Two previous studies conducted comprehensive assessments of task and equipment noise exposures on farms in Australia (Franklin et al, 2006;Depczynski et al, 2005). Five of those exposure measurements were directly comparable to tasks and equipment in the current study.…”

Section: Grain Production Equipmentmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…Assessment data on task-based noise exposures for agricultural operations are limited (Franklin et al, 2006;McBride et al, 2003;Depczynski et al, 2005;Humann et al, 2011;Milz et al, 2008;Lander et al, 2007). The few studies that have examined noise exposures of agricultural tasks used a variety of techniques for measuring and calculating task-based noise exposures.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Task-Based Noise Exposures for Farmers Involved in Grain Production

Humann

Sanderson²,

Donham³

et al. 2013

J. Agric. Safety and Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Few studies have been done examining noise exposures associated with agricultural tasks. This study was conducted to address that research gap by calculating the noise exposures for tasks and equipment associated with grain production and assessing the variability in those exposures. An additional aim of this study was to identify tasks and equipment that could be targeted for intervention strategies as a means toward reducing the total noise exposures of farmers and farm workers. Through the use of personal noise dosimetry and direct observation, over 30,000 one-minute noise exposure measurements and corresponding task and equipment data were collected on 18 farms and compiled into a task-based noise exposure database. Mean noise exposures were calculated for 23 tasks and 18 pieces of equipment. The noise exposures for the tasks and equipment ranged from 78.6 to 99.9 dBA and from 80.8 to 96.2 dBA, respectively, with most of the noise exposures having a large standard deviation and maximum noise exposure level. Most of the variability in the task and equipment noise exposures was attributable to within-farm variations (e.g., work practices, distance from noise sources). Comparisons of the mean noise exposures for the agricultural tasks and equipment revealed that most were not statistically different. Grain production tasks and equipment with high mean noise exposures were identified. However, the substantial variability in the noise exposures and the occurrence of intense noise measurements for nearly every task and piece of equipment indicate that targeting a few specific tasks or equipment for intervention strategies would reduce lifetime noise exposure but would not completely eliminate exposure to hazardous noise levels. Keywords. Noise, Noise exposure, Safety and health. ask-based noise exposure analysis may have the potential to identify tasks that expose farmers to hazardous noise levels and reduce the risk of noise-induced hearing loss by allowing interventions to be targeted toward those tasks. While allday monitoring to determine time-weighted average (TWA) exposures is useful, the changing work environment, variability in tasks and equipment, and varying workday hours limit the ability of the 8 h TWA to accurately characterize the exposures and associated health risks for agricultural workers, or to identify areas where noise exposures can be targeted for reduction. Task-based exposure assessments have been conducted for numerous hazards in

show abstract

“…Uma exposição durante 40 horas semanais aos níveis de ruído de 85 dB é considerada segura, porém, níveis acima desse limite podem causar hipoacusia [23]. Nesse sentido, Franklin et al [24], afirmam que em tratores agrícolas, a utilização de cabines pode reduzir o nível de ruído em até 16 dB.…”

Section: Condicionador De Arunclassified

Níveis de ruído no posto de operação de um trator agrícola na operação de semeadura

Farias

Schlosser²

2020

Tecno-log.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A utilização de tratores agrícolas expõe os operadores a diferentes agentes que podem ser nocivos à saúde, dentre eles, o ruído, que dependendo da intensidade, leva à perda gradual da sensibilidade auditiva dos operadores. Neste sentido, este trabalho teve como objetivo avaliar o nível de ruído que chega ao posto de operação em um trator agrícola tracionando uma semeadora-adubadora de precisão, equipada com dois tipos de mecanismos sulcadores de fertilizante, em quatro velocidades de trabalho e duas configurações do condicionador de ar; e comparar com os limites estabelecidos pela norma NR-15. Para a mensuração dos níveis de ruído foi utilizado um medidor de pressão sonora, posicionado a 0,15 m do ouvido do operador, com todas as aberturas do posto de operação fechadas. A intensidade sonora próxima ao ouvido do operador, em todos os tratamentos avaliados, foi inferior ao estabelecido pela norma, para uma exposição máxima de oito horas diárias. Há aumento significativo da pressão sonora quando se utiliza mecanismo sulcador de fertilizante do tipo haste em relação ao disco duplo e também, quando se utiliza o condicionador de ar. À medida que se aumenta a velocidade de trabalho do conjunto mecanizado ocorre um incremento linear na intensidade sonora.

show abstract

Factors Affecting Farm Noise During Common Agricultural Activities

Cited by 16 publications

References 3 publications

Vibration and noise assessment of tractor-trailer and truck-mounted chippers

Vibration and noise assessment of tractor-trailer and truck-mounted chippers

Task-Based Noise Exposures for Farmers Involved in Grain Production

Níveis de ruído no posto de operação de um trator agrícola na operação de semeadura

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About