This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Crown, E. M. Articles by Tan, Y.-b. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Design and Evaluation of Thermal Protective Flightsuits. Part II: Instrumented Mannequin Evaluation

Departments of Human Ecology and Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2M8 Canada

Mark Y. Ackerman

Departments of Human Ecology and Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2M8 Canada

J. Douglas Dale

Departments of Human Ecology and Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2M8 Canada

Yi-bin Tan

Departments of Human Ecology and Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB T6G 2M8 Canada

Flightsuit designs incorporating variation on four parameters of interest (one-piece vs two-piece, loose vs close fit, closure system, and seam type) were developed following a functional design process and using CAD procedures (Part I). Prototype garments were produced for each of three phases of instrumented mannequin testing of thermal protection. Fabrics used in the prototypes included a meta-aramid/carbon blend (phases 1 and 3), an FR viscose/meta-aramid blend (phases 2 and 3), and a meta-aramidlpbi blend (phase 3).

Style, fit, and closure system each had small but significant effects on the thermal protection provided by flightsuits. Loose-fitting garments provided better protection than close-fitting ones if the fullness was controlled by appropriate closures. Close-fitting cuff closures on sleeves and pant legs were more effective than were zipper closures. A stand-up collar offered better protection for the neck than a convertible collar. Two-piece flightsuits provided somewhat greater protection than one-piece coveralls, mainly due to the effect of garment layering below the waist. These effects were detected when flightsuits were tested without underwear. The style effect was masked when the garments were worn over long thermal protective underwear, demonstrating the effectiveness of garment layering. Thus, for best assurance of thermal protection, flight personnel should wear long protective underwear under flightsuits at all times; in climates where this underwear might not be suitable, it is recommended that one-and two-piece flightsuits be made in a more loosely-fitting style and incorporate a stand-up collar and adjustable cuffs on sleeves and pant legs.

Key Words: Key Words: thermal protection • protective clothing • instrumented mannequin testing • flightsuits.

Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, Vol. 16, No. 2, 79-87 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/0887302X9801600203


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?