How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

[aron_crow]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

Has anyone done some measurements on the sizes of the balloons vs the popping loudness (in db).
I tried that with 9" and 11" balloons and found them to nearly be the same (using an android app to measure the sound), there was very less background noise but I feel that the results were inaccurate. Would love to see if anyone else had the same idea.

[heleo]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

The balloon pops are very loud, you phone is going to clip and not be able to record the peaks.

[srob2]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

"A Weight" vs "C Weight" is going to make a big difference for larger balloons. Both are probably relevant. A high "A weight" is going to sound loud, but a high "C weight" will shake the room and possibly the neighbors.

168 is quoted all over the internet for a Unique 9" b2p.

The "A weight" are going to be about the same for different sizes - of course Belbals and Tuftex will be louder than Uniques. "C weight" will be higher the larger the balloon.

[Common Loon]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

Pop-science is one of my favorite topics ever

Here's something I'm still wondering about. When a balloon pops at very low strain - say, because of an unseen defect in the latex - it always bursts into only one or two big pieces. But it also tends to make a serrated, jagged edge on the shreds (like this shape, LOL: https://www.desmos.com/calculator/nj84rzlzp9 ).

I have a theory about why this happens, and only happens in low pressure bursts, but I'm interested to hear others' thoughts!

[aron_crow]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

"A Weight" vs "C Weight" is going to make a big difference for larger balloons. Both are probably relevant. A high "A weight" is going to sound loud, but a high "C weight" will shake the room and possibly the neighbors.

168 is quoted all over the internet for a Unique 9" b2p.

The "A weight" are going to be about the same for different sizes - of course Belbals and Tuftex will be louder than Uniques. "C weight" will be higher the larger the balloon.

168 db? wow. My phone measured somewhere along the lines of 95-100 db.

[yet_another_aussie]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

I think it's a shame that that one study exploded (lol) in popularity, because it seems like nobody else has really bothered to get decibel measurements of balloons popping. I believe it's not in the instant pain theshold (130dB?) and around the discomfort dB (110dB?)

Granted I think context is important. Distance to ear and space being important. Stomping in a hardwood floored room should be OMG but it's really not unless the latex is thiiiiiiiiccc. But B2P is close to the ears so i'd go hearing pro in any case, unless you really DGAF and need to hear the raw power of a bang.

Thoughts? Am I overcompensating for being phobic in the past?

[Common Loon]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

I think it's a shame that that one study exploded (lol) in popularity, because it seems like nobody else has really bothered to get decibel measurements of balloons popping.

Totally agreed. It's frustrating because like... you're scientists, you're supposed to figure out how to get some standardized measurements, not have a range of like 50 dB in the literature (which is what, like a factor of 10,000 on the power spectrum? get it together, eggheads!).

It's like you said, context matters so much both in the subjective and objective experience of a balloon pop. It's close to a pure impulse noise... so the acoustics of the environment have a huge impact on how it sounds to our ears, and at the same time the distance from the receiver and the balloon type/burst method both have outsized influences on the result. The best measurements would probably be ones taken in an anechoic chamber.

The Paytnen study has probably the most well-controlled set of measurements I've seen for the purpose and their average decibel levels were in the low-to-mid 130's: https://asa.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1121/1.3518780

Though note, while they did vary size and color of the balloons used, they didn't do very much to control the inflation level of the balloons very precisely. And in particular they didn't do any B2P, it was all pin popping. They write:

The resulting popping method closely resembles that of the normal in situ popping condition rather than other more elaborate methods seen in previous works.

In other words, "pin popping is how 'most people' burst balloons so it's the method we studied." Someone needs to send them a link to a looner forum

It wouldn't surprise me at all if, all else kept equal, if they'd done B2P instead of pin popping, they'd have gotten numbers in the 150s and higher, since that's what the notorious "168dB" study did: https://hearingreview.com/inside-hea...d-balloons-can

And of note, the 168dB number was for a Unique 9" balloon -- yep they cited the brand in the study, lol -- blown to pop with the microphone as physically close to the bursting balloon as possible. So it'd be like someone B2P'ing a 9 inch balloon with it resting on top of your eardrum... I don't care how much of a looner someone is, that's probably not anyone's idea of a good time!

[srob2]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

Big difference between an impulse and a sustained sound wave. 1 second at 130db is painful, 1 millisecond is not. The 169 study includes a MPE showing how many pops are safe. A b2p 0.5 meters from a child's ear is safe, but only once per day. Adults can safely b2p 13 per day.

I am sure manufacturers run tests. Balloons are made to pop, and they don't want to make unsafe products. I have seen another study showing levels from different sized balloons, and they all burst around the same level. Must be a fun job - being told to make something as difficult to pop as possible without going over 170db, then overinflating and measuring prototypes, and randomly overinflating a few balloons from every batch for quality control.

[Common Loon]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

I am sure manufacturers run tests. Balloons are made to pop, and they don't want to make unsafe products.

I actually wonder about this... because somehow I don't think they do this kind of testing. Consumer product safety laws are lax enough (in the US anyway) where the fact that they print "do not overinflate! always use a pump!" on the bag means they don't have to worry about the dangers caused by consumers "using the product in a way they were not designed to be used".

Which, y'know, I don't think B2P is in the manufacturer's design spec for a balloon

[npratt]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

Not sure if balloon manufacturers burst-test their product, but condom manufacturers definitely do. A long time ago Consumer Reports tested condoms, and they had a picture of one being inflated until burst; looked pretty interesting to me!

There probably still is a video on Youtube from Everts showing their factory in Malaysia. One shot was someone in the QC department inflating a balloon to look for defects. Nice work if you can get it!

[RubberTech]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

I remember an episode of "How its made" and they featured the Qtex factory where part of the QC process was inflating randomly selected balloons from different batches and inflating them to rated size then looking through them with a light to look for defects in the latex.

[frankfrank]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

Also an entire fetish studio has picked up on this trend, hehehe:
https://www.clips4sale.com/studio/53...ion-laboratory

I don't know the problem, but it says I must certify my age. I do, and it still says I need to certify my age...would enjoy seeing this.

[yet_another_aussie]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

Totally agreed. It's frustrating because like... you're scientists, you're supposed to figure out how to get some standardized measurements, not have a range of like 50 dB in the literature (which is what, like a factor of 10,000 on the power spectrum? get it together, eggheads!).

It's like you said, context matters so much both in the subjective and objective experience of a balloon pop. It's close to a pure impulse noise... so the acoustics of the environment have a huge impact on how it sounds to our ears, and at the same time the distance from the receiver and the balloon type/burst method both have outsized influences on the result. The best measurements would probably be ones taken in an anechoic chamber.

The Paytnen study has probably the most well-controlled set of measurements I've seen for the purpose and their average decibel levels were in the low-to-mid 130's: https://asa.scitation.org/doi/full/10.1121/1.3518780

Though note, while they did vary size and color of the balloons used, they didn't do very much to control the inflation level of the balloons very precisely. And in particular they didn't do any B2P, it was all pin popping. They write:



In other words, "pin popping is how 'most people' burst balloons so it's the method we studied." Someone needs to send them a link to a looner forum

It wouldn't surprise me at all if, all else kept equal, if they'd done B2P instead of pin popping, they'd have gotten numbers in the 150s and higher, since that's what the notorious "168dB" study did: https://hearingreview.com/inside-hea...d-balloons-can

And of note, the 168dB number was for a Unique 9" balloon -- yep they cited the brand in the study, lol -- blown to pop with the microphone as physically close to the bursting balloon as possible. So it'd be like someone B2P'ing a 9 inch balloon with it resting on top of your eardrum... I don't care how much of a looner someone is, that's probably not anyone's idea of a good time!

Left wanting more by scientific literature (which I admittedly cannot "properly" interpret except for dB numbers and conclusions) I did some searching in tinnitus forums and it appears that they've trial-and-error engineered a fair bit

• Avoid enclosed space pops such as cars
• If you're already in fight or flight, everything will be perceived louder
• Sometimes symptoms after an exposure are more psychological than physiological
• Often triggers appear to be events where bangs close to the ear (I will wager closer than 30CM) occur. This also correlates to the beginning of a lot of phobias where someone will also add "in my face" to the popping story
• If in doubt, wear hearing protection

[srob2]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

I actually wonder about this... because somehow I don't think they do this kind of testing. Consumer product safety laws are lax enough (in the US anyway) where the fact that they print "do not overinflate! always use a pump!" on the bag means they don't have to worry about the dangers caused by consumers "using the product in a way they were not designed to be used".

Which, y'know, I don't think B2P is in the manufacturer's design spec for a balloon

Went through all my bags today - not one said "Do not overinflate". All except one said "chocking hazard".

B2p a balloon - the neck always breaks and pieces fly away from your face. Sometimes a balloon's bulb will burst, but only when it doesn't reach the tightness and pressure of the others in the pack. The neck is thinner on purpose to do this.

If a balloon were designed to sit to pop, or otherwise crush, why not make the neck thicker and stronger so the bulb bursts? This is louder and more fun.

For decoration without popping, a thicker and stronger neck makes sense. Most people do not want the neck to inflate.

For pin popping, it does not matter.

Most people have done a b2p. If not by blowing knowing they won't stop until it goes boom, by blowing balloons bigger each time until they pop one. If anyone got hurt, they might not win in court, but if enough people get hurt, balloons will be banned.

I think b2p is very much in the design spec.

[BalloonblowerNYC]

Re: How about some scientific approach on balloon popping? :-)

I remember an episode of "How its made" and they featured the Qtex factory where part of the QC process was inflating randomly selected balloons from different batches and inflating them to rated size then looking through them with a light to look for defects in the latex.

This one?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2t35fVitWLQ

There is not much to see there other than an employee having much fun deflating a big pink balloon ;-)

Thats the older one, when they still had a plant in Germany too:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uAO1h_WcpU