Determination of clothing evaporative resistance on a sweating thermal manikin in an isothermal condition: heat loss method or mass loss method?

Annals of Occupational Hygiene Pub Date : 2011-08-01 Epub Date: 2011-06-13 DOI:10.1093/annhyg/mer034
Faming Wang, Chuansi Gao, Kalev Kuklane, Ingvar Holmér
{"title":"Determination of clothing evaporative resistance on a sweating thermal manikin in an isothermal condition: heat loss method or mass loss method?","authors":"Faming Wang,&nbsp;Chuansi Gao,&nbsp;Kalev Kuklane,&nbsp;Ingvar Holmér","doi":"10.1093/annhyg/mer034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This paper addresses selection between two calculation options, i.e heat loss option and mass loss option, for thermal manikin measurements on clothing evaporative resistance conducted in an isothermal condition (T(manikin) = T(a) = T(r)). Five vocational clothing ensembles with a thermal insulation range of 1.05-2.58 clo were selected and measured on a sweating thermal manikin 'Tore'. The reasons why the isothermal heat loss method generates a higher evaporative resistance than that of the mass loss method were thoroughly investigated. In addition, an indirect approach was applied to determine the amount of evaporative heat energy taken from the environment. It was found that clothing evaporative resistance values by the heat loss option were 11.2-37.1% greater than those based on the mass loss option. The percentage of evaporative heat loss taken from the environment (H(e,env)) for all test scenarios ranged from 10.9 to 23.8%. The real evaporative cooling efficiency ranged from 0.762 to 0.891, respectively. Furthermore, it is evident that the evaporative heat loss difference introduced by those two options was equal to the heat energy taken from the environment. In order to eliminate the combined effects of dry heat transfer, condensation, and heat pipe on clothing evaporative resistance, it is suggested that manikin measurements on the determination of clothing evaporative resistance should be performed in an isothermal condition. Moreover, the mass loss method should be applied to calculate clothing evaporative resistance. The isothermal heat loss method would appear to overestimate heat stress and thus should be corrected before use.</p>","PeriodicalId":8458,"journal":{"name":"Annals of Occupational Hygiene","volume":"55 7","pages":"775-83"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1093/annhyg/mer034","citationCount":"58","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annals of Occupational Hygiene","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/mer034","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2011/6/13 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 58

Abstract

This paper addresses selection between two calculation options, i.e heat loss option and mass loss option, for thermal manikin measurements on clothing evaporative resistance conducted in an isothermal condition (T(manikin) = T(a) = T(r)). Five vocational clothing ensembles with a thermal insulation range of 1.05-2.58 clo were selected and measured on a sweating thermal manikin 'Tore'. The reasons why the isothermal heat loss method generates a higher evaporative resistance than that of the mass loss method were thoroughly investigated. In addition, an indirect approach was applied to determine the amount of evaporative heat energy taken from the environment. It was found that clothing evaporative resistance values by the heat loss option were 11.2-37.1% greater than those based on the mass loss option. The percentage of evaporative heat loss taken from the environment (H(e,env)) for all test scenarios ranged from 10.9 to 23.8%. The real evaporative cooling efficiency ranged from 0.762 to 0.891, respectively. Furthermore, it is evident that the evaporative heat loss difference introduced by those two options was equal to the heat energy taken from the environment. In order to eliminate the combined effects of dry heat transfer, condensation, and heat pipe on clothing evaporative resistance, it is suggested that manikin measurements on the determination of clothing evaporative resistance should be performed in an isothermal condition. Moreover, the mass loss method should be applied to calculate clothing evaporative resistance. The isothermal heat loss method would appear to overestimate heat stress and thus should be corrected before use.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
等温条件下出汗热人体模型上衣服蒸发阻力的测定:热损失法还是质量损失法?
本文讨论了在等温条件下(T(人体)= T(a) = T(r))进行服装蒸发阻力热人体模型测量时,热损失选项和质量损失选项两种计算选项之间的选择。选择了五套隔热范围为1.05-2.58 clo的职业装,并在出汗热人体模型“Tore”上进行了测量。研究了等温热损失法比质量损失法产生更高蒸发阻力的原因。此外,还采用了间接方法来确定从环境中获取的蒸发热能的量。结果表明,热损失选项的服装蒸发阻值比质量损失选项的服装蒸发阻值大11.2 ~ 37.1%。在所有测试情景中,从环境中获取的蒸发热损失的百分比(H(e,env))从10.9%到23.8%不等。实际蒸发冷却效率范围为0.762 ~ 0.891。此外,很明显,这两种选择带来的蒸发热损失差等于从环境中获取的热能。为了消除干传热、冷凝和热管对服装蒸发阻力的综合影响,建议在等温条件下进行服装蒸发阻力测定的人体测量。同时,应采用质量损失法计算服装的蒸发阻力。等温热损失法似乎高估了热应力,因此在使用前应加以纠正。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
2 months
期刊最新文献
Delaware's 1999-2017 Leading Causes of Death Information Illustrates Its Obesity and Obesity-Related Life-Limiting Disease Burdens. Factors Associated With Non-compliance of Asbestos Occupational Standards in Brake Repair Workers. Whole Body Vibration Exposures and Health Status among Professional Truck Drivers: A Cross-sectional Analysis. Physicochemical Characterization of Aerosol Generated in the Gas Tungsten Arc Welding of Stainless Steel. Effect of Occupational Exposure on A(H1N1)pdm09 Infection and Hospitalization.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1