Εμφάνιση απλής εγγραφής

dc.creatorPoirier, M. P.en
dc.creatorMeade, R. D.en
dc.creatorMcGinn, R.en
dc.creatorFriesen, B. J.en
dc.creatorHardcastle, S. G.en
dc.creatorFlouris, A. D.en
dc.creatorKenny, G. P.en
dc.date.accessioned2015-11-23T10:45:49Z
dc.date.available2015-11-23T10:45:49Z
dc.date.issued2015
dc.identifier10.1080/15459624.2015.1029615
dc.identifier.issn1545-9624
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11615/32356
dc.description.abstractWe evaluated the effect of arc-flash and fire-resistant (AFR) clothing ensembles (CE) on whole-body heat dissipation during work in the heat. On 10 occasions, 7 males performed four 15-min cycling bouts at a fixed rate of metabolic heat production (400 W) in the heat (35 degrees C), each separated by 15-min of recovery. Whole-body heat loss and metabolic heat production were measured by direct and indirect calorimetry, respectively. Body heat storage was calculated as the temporal summation of heat production and heat loss. Responses were compared in a semi-nude state and while wearing two CE styles: (1) single-piece (coveralls) and (2) two-piece (workpant + long-sleeve shirt). For group 1, there was one non-AFR single-piece CE (CE1(STD)) and three single-piece CE with AFR properties (CE2(AFR), CE3(AFR), CE4(AFR)). For group 2, there was one non-AFR two-piece CE (CE5(STD)) and four two-piece CE with AFR properties (CE6(AFR), CE7(AFR), CE8(AFR), CE9(AFR)). The workpants for CE6(AFR) were not AFR-rated, while a cotton undershirt was also worn for conditions CE8(AFR) and CE9(AFR) and for all single-piece CE. Heat storage for all conditions (CE1(STD): 328 +/- 55, CE2(AFR): 335 +/- 87, CE3(AFR): 309 +/- 95, CE4(AFR): 403 +/- 104, CE5(STD): 253 +/- 78, CE6(AFR): 268 +/- 89, CE7(AFR): 302 +/- 70, CE8(AFR): 360 +/- 36, CE9(AFR): 381 +/- 99 kJ) was greater than the semi-nude state (160 +/- 124 kJ) (all p <= 0.05). No differences were measured between single-piece uniforms (p = 0.273). Among the two-piece uniforms, heat storage was greater for CE8(AFR) and CE9(AFR) relative to CE5(STD) and CE6(AFR) (all p <= 0.05), but not CE7(AFR) (both p > 0.05). Differences between clothing styles were measured such that greater heat storage was observed in both CE1(STD) and CE2-4(AFR) relative to CE5(STD.) Further, heat storage was greater in CE2(AFR) and CE4(AFR) relative to CE6(AFR), while it was greater in CE4(AFR) compared to CE7(AFR). Body heat storage during work in the heat was not influenced by the use of AFR fabrics in the single- or two-piece uniforms albeit less heat was stored in the two-piece uniforms when no undershirt was worn. However, heat storage was comparable between clothing styles when an undershirt was worn with the two-piece uniform.en
dc.source.uri<Go to ISI>://WOS:000360325500007
dc.subjectbody heat storageen
dc.subjectheat stressen
dc.subjectcalorimetryen
dc.subjectwhole-body heat lossen
dc.subjectpersonal protective clothingen
dc.subjectOLDER-ADULTSen
dc.subjectBODYen
dc.subjectSTORAGEen
dc.subjectSTRESSen
dc.subjectTHERMOMETRYen
dc.subjectTEXTILESen
dc.subjectSTRAINen
dc.subjectWORKen
dc.subjectDRYen
dc.subjectEnvironmental Sciencesen
dc.subjectPublic, Environmental & Occupational Healthen
dc.titleThe Influence of Arc-Flash and Fire-Resistant Clothing on Thermoregulation during Exercise in the Heaten
dc.typejournalArticleen


Αρχεία σε αυτό το τεκμήριο

ΑρχείαΜέγεθοςΤύποςΠροβολή

Δεν υπάρχουν αρχεία που να σχετίζονται με αυτό το τεκμήριο.

Αυτό το τεκμήριο εμφανίζεται στις ακόλουθες συλλογές

Εμφάνιση απλής εγγραφής