| by |
The Technical Staff of LightSPEED Technologies |
We hope you find this series informative. If you have additional questions on what we've covered or have points of interest to share relating to ANR, please e-mail us at the link above.
|
In this section, we'll be looking at the comfort and human-factors issues
associated with ANR headsets. The ergonomics of the human head demand a wide
range of adjustments to deliver comfort over hours of use.
Optimizing the physical headset for pilot use
Active pilots have been searching for ways to improve the physical aspects of
the flying experience, but it's not easy to design a comfortable headset, as
you'll see. While active cancellation certainly helps you feel more relaxed
during your hours aloft, you're still constrained by the physics of pressure,
weight, and temperature.
In many ways these comfort and fit issues apply to all headsets...not
just active ones. But the human factors relating to user convenience are
certainly more complicated for ANR headsets. ANR places additional constraints
on the cavity and ear seal design. Furthermore, the electronics for cancellation
require power, and most are supported by some form of portable power pack. The
size and weight of such packs can be a pilot convenience factor, as can various
other features available in the newer offerings.
A comfortable headset...the search for the Holy Grail!
Comfort is a relatively recent addition to the pilot's want-list. Early on,
hearing protection and hands-free communication were the principle reasons for
using a headset. The original and most popular headset design was developed for
optimal passive attenuation. The focus was on military needs, and thus for noise
environments often much harsher than those we encounter in General Aviation.
As needs and materials evolved, some changes were introduced to reduce weight
and improve comfort. But unfortunately, these evolutionary changes have done
little to add comfort in this "classic" headset design.
Why is it so hard to design a headset that fits well and wears well?
It turns out there's substantial variation in the sizes and shapes of
human heads. The chart below is data gathered from military ergonomic standards
for head sizes. It compares the dimensional differences for men and women
covering the 5th to 95th percentile of people...basically
almost the whole population!
The challenge for fit: the 5-95% dimensions for head width, height, and ear
position:

| Measurement |
5th Percentile (W)
|
95th Percentile
(M) |
Range |
| A |
Ear Height |
11.6 cm |
14.4 cm |
>1"(each side!) |
| B |
Head Breadth (Width) |
13.5 cm |
16.5 cm |
>1.2" |
| C |
Overhead Circumference |
31.3 cm |
37.8 cm |
>2.5" |
| D |
Ear Protrusion |
1.3 cm |
2.8 cm |
> 1/2" |
Source: Human Engineering Design Criteria for Military
Systems, Mil-Std 1472C
As you can see, the challenge to get both adjustability and a
comfortable fit is a difficult one. The classic design relied on side pressure
to compensate for the width variations. The metal overhead band has some
adjustment for circumference but no accommodation was provided for ear
protrusion. In analyzing how to make a more versatile headset design, the issues
boil down to size and side pressure!
Adjustability
Obviously the headset needs to adjust big enough (or small enough for ladies)
to properly fit at the start of your flight.
Look at some of the
variability in things like head width (over 1 inch!) or the position of ears on
the side of an "average" head! Overhead circumference means the headband needs
to have ample "length" adjustment to extend the needed 2.5 inches. That's a lot.
Ladies and children need it to compress to fit their smaller heads. Yet many
pilots are men with size 7 3/4 hats!! While all this is certainly possible,
you'd be surprised how many existing designs cannot cover that range of heads.
Comfort over time
But for most of you, your "comfort problem" isn't that your headset can't fit
you when you first put it on, but rather that it starts to hurt after a short
time. If you have flown much at all, you also know your comfort needs change
some over the 1 or 2 or 4 hours you might be flying.
Without getting too
medical, let's try to understand why. There is very little "subcutaneous fat"
(flesh, padding, etc!) under the skin covering your skull. The head is also
extremely vascular (there is lots of blood flowing around under this thin
layer). The area around the ears is particularly dense in blood vessels. Head
surfaces get tender or "fatigued" by constant pressure and typically develop
sore spots from wearing a headset. These "hot spots" are actually places where
the blood flow has been constricted (from pressure) and become sources of pain!
The combination of little fat and high blood flow makes this region
hypersensitive to pressure.
With that understood, then, a premium is
placed on "uniform" distribution of the weight...both over the top of the head
and the compression exerted by the earseals around your ears. Making a headset
lighter in total weight is good, but actually the distribution of
that weight is the more important variable to comfort. Heavier headsets with
pads that distribute weight evenly over a broad area will feel much more
comfortable than one that is lighter but has limited contour distribution over
the top of your head. That's accomplished by proper radial design of the
headband system and effective padding. In summary, the comfort of your headset
will have a lot to do with the overall design and the "head interface"...the way
it fits and conforms to your head shape and ears.
Those all-important ear seals
The ear seal design is probably the most important aspect of overall flying
comfort. Size, shape, and material choice all affect the comfort of the headset,
as well as its noise attenuation in both passive and active modes. It should be
noted there are several "special" aspects to consider in designing a comfortable
earcup cavity. Ideally, the ear would be floating free in the cavity...not
touching any aspect of the seal or speaker system. That has a direct bearing on
the size, shape, and construction of the optimal ear seal:
-
Cavity opening orientation: As noted in Section 1 of
this series, proper orientation and shape will also help isolate the ear from
the seal. Many pilots actually tilt their 'oval' shaped domes backward to
better align them with their ear.
-
Cavity depth: Notice the >1/2" variation in "ear protrusion" on
the above chart. This must be accommodated either in the depth of the ear seal
or in the dome cavity opening.
-
Cavity volume and ventilation: Greater depth also helps in keeping
the ear cooler...more air space that heats up slower. The material used to
surround the seal would also ideally be breathable...minimizing humidity (and
sweat buildup) around the ear. Within reason, larger is better when designing
for ear comfort.
Obviously we'd like the ear seal to create a cavity space that is both
comfortable and quiet. It turns out there are tradeoffs between optimal comfort
and getting the maximum passive attenuation. Let's take a look at different
materials used in ear seals to learn more about the strengths and weaknesses of
each.
Ear
Seal Material |
Attenuation Properties 1 |
Ability to
Conform 2 |
Side
Pressure Needed 3 |
Ear Seal
Weight 4 |
Relative
Volume 5 |
| Silicone Gel |
Best |
Worst |
High |
1.2 oz |
100% |
| Liquid |
Very Good |
Best |
Medium |
.6 oz |
25% |
| Foam/Liquid
(Gelflo) |
Good |
Good |
Medium |
.6 oz |
70% |
| Temperature- Sensitive
foam |
Good |
Very Good |
Low |
.5 oz |
150-200% |
Ear Seal Material
Characteristics
1 the ability to cross-sectionally block out
noise.
2 how easily the material will flow to
cover an uneven surface.
3 the amount of pressure
needed to seal against a vertical uneven surface.
4 the weight of a "normal" aviation earseal for
various ANR headset.
5 compared to a silicone
seal, how large is the cavity volume created by the ear seal.
You'll notice that the best materials for blocking out sound are liquid and
silicone. Liquid certainly conforms the best to uneven surfaces (like the side
of your head!) but requires reasonable pressure because of the vertical
orientation...the liquid will stay at the "bottom" of the seal unless the side
pressure is adequate to "squeeze" it up around your ears. In a headset
application, the silicone is actually better since it will stay in place.
Foam/liquid and Thermal-conforming foams don't have as much cross-sectional
density to provide the best attenuation passively.
From a comfort standpoint, silicone gel seals may not be the best
choice. It is a dense material...does not easily conform to the many
variations around the back of your ears. It only conforms under relatively high
pressure (compared to the other choices). It provides adequate relative volume
but is quite heavy...twice the weight of the other ear seals! Liquid seals
provide very little cavity volume and require medium side pressure for a good
seal.
Temperature-sensitive foam materials are clear winners for conformability,
minimum side pressure, and ear cavity volume. It's particularly effective when
wearing glasses. The conformability helps minimize the localized pressure of the
stems pushing on your temples! All of those characteristics will translate into
a more comfortable headset.
As we have pointed out earlier, the best and only sure way to decide about
comfort in a headset is to fly it.
What does this have to do with ANR performance?
Comfort and fit, by themselves, have little to do with active cancellation
but ear seal conformability does. Remember back to Section 1...the
discussion about needing a stable acoustic cavity for maximum cancellation. Even
more than in a passive headset, an ANR headset needs to provide an "acoustically
tight" fit. Tight doesn't have to be vise-like, but a good seal to the head is
required to get proper cancellation If you doubt this, lift off the ear seal of
an active headset while flying. You'll hear the system become unstable and start
to oscillate.
Particularly when the amounts of active cancellation are high, a stable
acoustic cavity with no "leaks" is important. That seal comes from either a
dense material under high pressure or something of lower density with lower
pressure.
What about lightweight ANR headsets... Do they work?
For many pilots, the "superaural" headsets might be more comfortable. These
are the type that sit "on" the outer surface of the ear. They are light in
weight and provide good ventilation for the ear. Their obvious disadvantages
include limited noise isolation, limited passive protection, and a lack of basic
headset features like volume controls.
Because of the sensitivity of the ear surfaces, sometimes these actually are
less comfortable than a typical over-the-ear headset. For some
cabin-class planes, they may be a nice solution. If you have a really quiet
plane, give them a try and compare them to a circumaural (muff-type) for the
tradeoffs between comfort and peaceful flying.
Powered headsets...what a hassle!
The one issue that is most noticeable about active systems is their need for
an external power. With passive headsets the sidetone audio (what you hear) and
the voltage to drive your microphone preamp (for what you say) are supplied by
amplifiers in your avionics. The result is you have no need for external power
for that headset to work. In active headsets, additional power is required to
support the active electronics in the headset itself. In Section 1, we
discussed the efficiency of various speakers and electronics and how they would
effect cancellation performance and battery life. All that ties into this
discussion of power and portability.
The majority of ANR headset users require portable power. For most pilots, a
portable ANR system conjures up images of large, bulky battery packs with a
rat's nest of extra cables. That was the norm up until just two years ago. As a
result in improved efficiency, the "typical" ANR headset battery box went from 6
AA's and a separate cable to just 2 AA's placed inline with your normal headset
cord. All that while battery life stayed in the 30 to 40 hour
range...months of flying for many of us! Most pilots favor portable ANR
headsets that use AA batteries rather than 9-volt batteries, since most pilots
already carry a stash of AA's for their handheld GPS, mini Maglight flashlight,
etc.
Then there's the problem of leaving the headset on at the conclusion of a
flight, something that doesn't do much for battery life. Certainly the best
solution for this dilemma is some "Auto-Off" feature built into the headset. It
senses when you have it off your head and automatically shuts off. It will
become more popular in the coming years.
Rechargeables
People have asked about using rechargeable batteries with ANR headsets. You
can use rechargeable AA batteries in most battery-powered units, though the life
expectancy drops about in half (compared to alkalines), and making sure that
they are always recharged before flight can be a hassle. Some ANR headets have
built-in rechargable batteries, offering the benefit of no extra "box." The
built-in battery can be convenient as long as you remember to take the headset
out of the plane after each flight and charge it fully for the next use. As with
all rechargeables, battery life is substantially less than with alkalines, but
more than adequate for normal flying...if you remember to charge them
before flight.
While battery life is important, the truth is that more batteries are lost to
forgetfulness (forgetting to turn the headset electronics off) than to sheer
hours aloft. That's really the "Achilles heel" of a rechargeable headset...if
you forgot to turn it off yesterday, you are out of luck with active
cancellation today! The rechargeables can't be charged in-flight while you're
using the headset, and you can't change the batteries before or during flight if
the built-in ones run low.
Aircraft power
ANR headsets powered from aircraft power can solve these problems and
completely eliminate the issues of batteries, battery boxes, etc. Most
aircraft-powered ANR headsets have integrated panel jacks that allow for a
clean, single connection for all audio and power connections. Others provide a
separate power connection (via the cigarette lighter or a separate power jack),
but this means you have to plug in three separate connectors (mic, phones,
power).
The convenience of the panel-wired single connection is great, but
installation is something that should be done by an avionics shop, so plan on
additional $150-200 installation expense for each headset position. Unless you
fly an awful lot, this could be equivalent to a lifetime supply of AA
batteries! That's one reason that for many pilots, a portable model makes more
sense.
Most of the latest generation of active headsets come with a full set of
standard features for easy use. These would include dual volume controls,
stereo/mono capability, some form of battery gauge, and a padded bag for
carrying and protecting your investment. Different suppliers provide these
features and functions in slightly different ways, so make sure you pay
attention to them when you test-fly different headset models.
So there!
Now you know more than you probably thought possible concerning what headset
design factors contribute to a comfortable flight. In the final section of
this series, we'll tie together all that we've learned about hearing protection,
improved communications, and comfort...when we look at the physiological issues
that affect the pilot. We'll explore how low-frequency noise affects fatigue
both mental and physical and how that can affect pilot reaction times and
decision-making capabilties. A fellow pilot who is an audiologist will be
contributing to this discussion, drawing from his professional knowledge and
experience to help address these issues.
LightSPEED
Technologies, Inc.
15812 SW Upper Boones Ferry Road
Lake Oswego,
Oregon 97035 USA