2007, Piran, Slovenia
2007, Piran, Slovenia 2007, Piran, Slovenia
Environmental Ergonomics XII Igor B. Mekjavic, Stelios N. Kounalakis & Nigel A.S. Taylor (Eds.), © BIOMED, Ljubljana 2007 434 MEASURING CLOTHING INSULATION: ANALYSIS OF HUMAN DATA BASED ON MANIKIN TESTS. Kalev Kuklane 1 , Chuansi Gao 1 , Ingvar Holmér 1 , Peter Broede 2 , Victor Candas 2 , Emiel den Hartog 2 , Harriet Meinander 2 , Wolfgang Nocker 2 , Mark Richards 2 , George Havenith 2 1 EAT, Dept. of Design Sciences, Lund University, Sweden 2 Thermprotect study group Contact person: kalev.kuklane@design.lth.se INTRODUCTION Within the THERMPROTECT project (Havenith et al., 2006) work package 2 Moisture (WP2), a series of human tests was carried out (Kuklane et al., 2007). One main objective of the WP2 was to study the question: What is the effect of evaporation/condensation within protective clothing on the heat transfer to the environment? This paper compares some methods of estimating clothing insulation, analyses human data based on manikin tests and discusses the sources for differences. METHODS In human tests, three variables at the same work load were combined: permeable (PERM, Rct=0.025 m 2 °C/W, Ret=5.6 m 2 Pa/W) and impermeable (IMP, Rct=0.007 m 2 °C/W, Ret=∞) outer layer, high (25°C) and low (10°C) ambient temperature, and wet (W) and dry (D) cotton underwear. Based on mean skin and body temperature, metabolic rate (Kuklane et al., 2007) and heat balance analysis, the total resultant clothing insulation (Itr) was calculated for all conditions. Data from standing manikin measurements (va=0.2 m/s) with dry underwear were used to compare the different calculation methods with data from the subjects. Heat losses from the whole manikin (covered and uncovered areas) were used to calculate the total clothing insulation (Itot) according to parallel method (equation 3 in EN/ISO 15831, 2004, here Eq. 1; Ts and Ta – manikin surface alt. ambient air temperature; A – manikin surface area; Hc – dry heat losses), and then corrected for wind and walking by equation 32 of ISO/FDIS 9920 (2007, here Eq. 2; var – air velocity; vw – walking velocity ) that was intended for the ensembles within the particular insulation range. Data from wet manikin tests (Havenith et al., 2006) at 10 and 34°C (both with 1 kPa ambient water vapour pressure) were used for further analysis and discussion of the differences. The conditions included dry and sweating tests. tot ( Ts − Ta ) A H c I = × (Eq. 1) I tr = e 2 2 [ −0. 281× ( v −0. 15) + 0. 044× ( v −0. 15) −0. 492v + 0. 176v ] ar ar w w × I tot (Eq. 2) RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The measured metabolic rate was 168 ±19 W/m 2 . In the wet tests, the metabolic rate averaged 8 W/m 2 higher than the dry tests. Figure 1 shows the heat balance components. Evaporation was assumed to take place at the skin surface. For condition PERM25W, in particular, this produced unrealistic dry heat loss values. The most reasonable insulation values (Figure 2) from the subjects came from dry test at 10°C, where the evaporation component was minimal and body heat storage relatively small (Figure 1). These values did fit best with the insulation correction of the manikin measurements according to ISO/FDIS 9920 (Figure 2). Figure 2 also shows for reference the original insulation value from a standing manikin, at an air velocity of 0.2 m/s (Itot(
Heat balance components 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% -20% E K+C+R RES S IMP10D IMP10W IMP25D IMP25W PERM10D PERM10W PERM25D PERM25W Manikins Figure 1. Ratio of heat balance components: evaporation (E), conduction , convection and radiation (K+C+R), respiration (RES) and heat storage (S). Physical work (W) was taken equal to zero. Evaporative component was based on the mass loss. Insulation (m 2 °C/W) 0.30 0.25 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 Impermeable Permeable Itr,10D Itr,10W Itr,25D Itr,25W Itot(
- Page 383 and 384: Thermal comfort INTERNATIONAL STAND
- Page 385 and 386: Acute and chronic heat exposure PHY
- Page 387 and 388: Acute and chronic heat exposure Fig
- Page 389 and 390: Acute and chronic heat exposure EFF
- Page 391 and 392: Acute and chronic heat exposure 2.2
- Page 393 and 394: Acute and chronic heat exposure EFF
- Page 395 and 396: Acute and chronic heat exposure A N
- Page 397 and 398: Acute and chronic heat exposure of
- Page 399 and 400: Acute and chronic heat exposure PHY
- Page 401 and 402: Acute and chronic heat exposure Tab
- Page 403 and 404: Acute and chronic heat exposure INT
- Page 405 and 406: probability plot 99 95 80 60 40 20
- Page 407 and 408: Acute and chronic heat exposure HAN
- Page 409 and 410: Acute and chronic heat exposure ALL
- Page 411 and 412: Acute and chronic heat exposure Tab
- Page 413 and 414: Acute and chronic heat exposure UNC
- Page 415 and 416: Thermal Sensation Scale 10 9 8 7 6
- Page 417 and 418: Acute and chronic heat exposure RES
- Page 419 and 420: Acute and chronic heat exposure eve
- Page 421 and 422: Acute and chronic heat exposure 30%
- Page 423 and 424: Acute and chronic heat exposure REF
- Page 425 and 426: RADIANT FLOW THROUGH BICYCLE HELMET
- Page 427 and 428: Figure 2. Difference in heat transf
- Page 429 and 430: Manikins DEVELOPMENT OF A LYING DOW
- Page 431 and 432: IT = 6.45( _ ,Tsk - _ ,Tair)/(Q/A)
- Page 433: Manikins cases. If the body is even
- Page 437 and 438: Manikins clothing system. This effe
- Page 439 and 440: Manikins The coupled system was val
- Page 441 and 442: Manikins A NOVEL APPROACH TO MODEL-
- Page 443 and 444: Manikins THERMAL MANIKIN EVALUATION
- Page 445 and 446: SR (g/min) Figure 2. Predictive mod
- Page 447 and 448: ESTIMATION OF COOLING EFFECT OF ICE
- Page 449 and 450: Manikins Figure 3: Comparison among
- Page 451 and 452: Manikins EVALUATION OF THE ARMY BOO
- Page 453 and 454: Ty [Nm] 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 5 10
- Page 455 and 456: Manikins different black 100% cotto
- Page 457 and 458: Manikins REFERENCES Bogerd, C.P., H
- Page 459 and 460: Modelling RESULTS From this kind of
- Page 461 and 462: Modelling (T , T , V& , ) = 1. 0 +
- Page 463 and 464: NORMALIZED CVCL 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 M
- Page 465 and 466: Modelling illustrated in Figure 1.
- Page 467 and 468: Modelling MODELLING PATIENT TEMPERA
- Page 469 and 470: Modelling Figure 1: Blood and mean
- Page 471 and 472: Modelling simulations the additiona
- Page 473 and 474: Modelling Table 1. Descriptive summ
- Page 475 and 476: Modelling concomitant increase in b
- Page 477 and 478: Modelling REFERENCES 1. U.S. Depart
- Page 479 and 480: Modelling from the 1988 population.
- Page 481 and 482: Modelling somatotypes in multivaria
- Page 483 and 484: Modelling Each scan data was first
Environmental Ergonomics XII<br />
Igor B. Mekjavic, Stelios N. Kounalakis & Nigel A.S. Taylor (Eds.), © BIOMED, Ljubljana <strong>2007</strong><br />
434<br />
MEASURING CLOTHING INSULATION:<br />
ANALYSIS OF HUMAN DATA BASED ON MANIKIN TESTS.<br />
Kalev Kuklane 1 , Chuansi Gao 1 , Ingvar Holmér 1 , Peter Broede 2 , Victor Candas 2 , Emiel<br />
den Hartog 2 , Harriet Meinander 2 , Wolfgang Nocker 2 , Mark Richards 2 , George Havenith 2<br />
1 EAT, Dept. of Design Sciences, Lund University, Sweden<br />
2 Thermprotect study group<br />
Contact person: kalev.kuklane@design.lth.se<br />
INTRODUCTION<br />
Within the THERMPROTECT project (Havenith et al., 2006) work package 2 Moisture<br />
(WP2), a series of human tests was carried out (Kuklane et al., <strong>2007</strong>). One main objective of<br />
the WP2 was to study the question: What is the effect of evaporation/condensation within<br />
protective clothing on the heat transfer to the environment? This paper compares some<br />
methods of estimating clothing insulation, analyses human data based on manikin tests and<br />
discusses the sources for differences.<br />
METHODS<br />
In human tests, three variables at the same work load were combined: permeable (PERM,<br />
Rct=0.025 m 2 °C/W, Ret=5.6 m 2 Pa/W) and impermeable (IMP, Rct=0.007 m 2 °C/W, Ret=∞)<br />
outer layer, high (25°C) and low (10°C) ambient temperature, and wet (W) and dry (D) cotton<br />
underwear. Based on mean skin and body temperature, metabolic rate (Kuklane et al., <strong>2007</strong>)<br />
and heat balance analysis, the total resultant clothing insulation (Itr) was calculated for all<br />
conditions. Data from standing manikin measurements (va=0.2 m/s) with dry underwear were<br />
used to compare the different calculation methods with data from the subjects. Heat losses<br />
from the whole manikin (covered and uncovered areas) were used to calculate the total<br />
clothing insulation (Itot) according to parallel method (equation 3 in EN/ISO 15831, 2004,<br />
here Eq. 1; Ts and Ta – manikin surface alt. ambient air temperature; A – manikin surface area;<br />
Hc – dry heat losses), and then corrected for wind and walking by equation 32 of ISO/FDIS<br />
9920 (<strong>2007</strong>, here Eq. 2; var – air velocity; vw – walking velocity ) that was intended for the<br />
ensembles within the particular insulation range. Data from wet manikin tests (Havenith et al.,<br />
2006) at 10 and 34°C (both with 1 kPa ambient water vapour pressure) were used for further<br />
analysis and discussion of the differences. The conditions included dry and sweating tests.<br />
tot<br />
( Ts<br />
− Ta<br />
) A H c<br />
I = × (Eq. 1)<br />
I<br />
tr<br />
= e<br />
2<br />
2<br />
[ −0.<br />
281×<br />
( v −0.<br />
15)<br />
+ 0.<br />
044×<br />
( v −0.<br />
15)<br />
−0.<br />
492v<br />
+ 0.<br />
176v<br />
]<br />
ar ar<br />
w w ×<br />
I<br />
tot<br />
(Eq. 2)<br />
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION<br />
The measured metabolic rate was 168 ±19 W/m 2 . In the wet tests, the metabolic rate averaged<br />
8 W/m 2 higher than the dry tests. Figure 1 shows the heat balance components. Evaporation<br />
was assumed to take place at the skin surface. For condition PERM25W, in particular, this<br />
produced unrealistic dry heat loss values. The most reasonable insulation values (Figure 2)<br />
from the subjects came from dry test at 10°C, where the evaporation component was minimal<br />
and body heat storage relatively small (Figure 1). These values did fit best with the insulation<br />
correction of the manikin measurements according to ISO/FDIS 9920 (Figure 2). Figure 2<br />
also shows for reference the original insulation value from a standing manikin, at an air<br />
velocity of 0.2 m/s (Itot(