Mitchell Trickett

Student # 20363321
SPPH 581D Capstone Project Proposal
Winter Term 2 2022

Objective Statement:

There are numerous hearing protection device (HPD) de-rating methods that have been
proposed and used by various authorities over time. De-rating the NRR is required when
selecting HPD because manufacturers tend to overestimate the effectiveness of their HPD’s.
The objective of this study would be to evaluate several of these methods and through
quantitative analysis of various types of HPD’s, determine which de-rating method provides the
most accurate noise reduction rating (NRR), when applied in a laboratory setting.

Methods and Approach:

To achieve the objective of this project, an in-depth literature review of existing studies
and scientific articles concerning the various de-rating methods will be performed in order to
create a strong foundation and understanding of the current procedures being used in several
of the most influential occupational health and safety jurisdictions throughout the world. Once
this has been completed, a laboratory evaluation will be developed and conducted to quantify
the actual personal attenuation ratings (PAR’s) of various types of HPD.
The 3M E-A-R Fit Testing validation system will be used to calculate the difference
between the sound level inside the ear canal versus the sound level outside the ear canal; this
value is known as the personal attenuation rating (PAR). The obtained PAR is important because
it shows how effective that specific type of HPD is for that specific user when used by that
specific user.
A potential issue arises due to the system only working with 3M HPD’s that must be
purchased from 3M. The 3M E-A-R Fit compatible HPD’s have a small tube that travels through
the device so that sound can travel through the tube an into the measurement system for
quantification. If HPD’s other than 3M products are to be tested, they must be modified in a
way that allows the small tube to be inserted through the device without drastically affecting its
protection quality. It is speculated that this may be achieved by carefully removing the small
tube from a 3M product, making small hole through a non-3M product and placing the tube
through the hole. Glue may be applied to improve the noise-proofing quality of the modified
HPD. Both muffs and plugs may be tested, depending on the availability of resources for this
project. It resources allow, wearing both muffs and plugs may be evaluated.
After the experimental portion of the project has been competed, various de-rating
values will be calculated using the equations proposed by the CSA, NIOSH/OSHA, EU and high,
medium, low (HML) method to determine the hypothetical NRR’s. The obtained PAR’s will then
be compared to the various calculated NRR’s and the NRR proposed by the manufacturer to
determine which method provides the most realistic de-rating value.
 Mitchell Trickett
Student # 20363321

How and to what extent will this project demonstrate proficiency of key OEH competencies?:

 Strategic thinking – Identifying an issue and creating a strategy to solve or improve the
understanding of the issue in the given time using the given resources.
 Negotiating with others as to why this project is worth executing and spending
resources to complete.
 Reviewing literature to keep up with the current advances and technologies available to
a hygienist to reduce the potential for harm to workers.
 Creating, developing and planning a laboratory-based experiment to critically evaluate
the claims made by the various jurisdictions.
 Working with others to design and execute a study.
 Designing and evaluating an experiment and the obtained results using statistical
methods to increase the validity and significance of any inferences or conclusions that
may be made based on the results.
 Organizing and managing a project.
 Data management and presenting the data in a useful way.
 Communicating the results of a study to others in a manner that allows them to
understand what was completed and how it may benefit them.
 Improving upon existing methods that may not provide the best results.
 Being familiar with how various jurisdictions face challenges, such as an ineffective
manufacturer NRR, and the values that each jurisdiction base their regulations on. Also,
understanding that the regulations are the bare minimum required and that going
beyond can improve worker health.
 HPD’s are one of the most common pieces of personal protective equipment (PPE) that
are used in occupational settings. Understanding how to evaluate their effectiveness in
order to choose the correct HPD for the application is a critical task of an safety
professional.

Resources and Timeline:

This project will require use of the 3M E-A-R Fit Testing validation system, which is
available at the OEH lab. It will also require various types of HPD’s, which may be available at
the OEH lab. It is unknown what products the OEH lab will have available to use for this project,
therefore they made need to be obtained from another source. If possible, additional types of
non-3M HPD’s may be used to increase the sample size and reach of this project. These HPD’s
will need to obtained and modified. In addition, some standards, such as CSA standard Z.94.2-
14 will need to be obtained to provide guidance on how the de-rating is applied in Canada. Dr.
Hugh Davies may have access to this document or its equivalent. The initial proposal of ideas
was supported by Dr. Christopher McLeod, who will continue to provide support throughout
the project. This project may also require some initial information and instruction from both Dr.
Hugh Davies and Matty Jeronimo in order to learn how to properly use the equipment and help
refine the proposed method(s).
 Mitchell Trickett
Student # 20363321

It is intended that this project will be fully completed and a written report submitted by
April 11, 2022. A proposed timeline of the project is as follows:

 January 14 – Submission of project proposal.

 January 28 – Required resources and how to obtain them will be identified.
 February 18 – Methods will be finalized.
 February 28 – Submission of literature review of current information and studies
concerning the project.
 March 14 – Completion of experimental portion of project.
 March 25 – Completion of data analysis.
 April 11 – Final report written and submitted.