Patel Tejash, Mullen Stephen P, Santee William R
Biophysics and Biomedical Modeling Division, U.S. Army Institute of Environmental Medicine, 42 Kansas Street, Natick, MA 01760, USA.
Mil Med. 2013 Aug;178(8):926-33. doi: 10.7205/MILMED-D-13-00117.
Environmental heat illness and injuries are a serious concern for the Army and Marines. Currently, the Wet-Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT) index is used to evaluate heat injury risk. The index is a weighted average of dry-bulb temperature (Tdb), black globe temperature (Tbg), and natural wet-bulb temperature (Tnwb). The WBGT index would be more widely used if it could be determined using standard weather instruments. This study compares models developed by Liljegren at Argonne National Laboratory and by Matthew at the U.S. Army Institute of Environmental Medicine that calculate WBGT using standard meteorological measurements. Both models use air temperature (Ta), relative humidity, wind speed, and global solar radiation (RG) to calculate Tnwb and Tbg. The WBGT and meteorological data used for model validation were collected at Griffin, Georgia and Yuma Proving Ground (YPG), Arizona. Liljegren (YPG: R(2) = 0.709, p < 0.01; Griffin: R(2) = 0.854, p < 0.01) showed closer agreement between calculated and actual WBGT than Matthew (YPG: R(2) = 0.630, p < 0.01; Griffin: R(2) = 0.677, p < 0.01). Compared to actual WBGT heat categorization, the Matthew model tended to underpredict compared to Liljegren's classification. Results indicate Liljegren is an acceptable alternative to direct WBGT measurement, but verification under other environmental conditions is needed.
环境性热疾病和损伤是陆军和海军陆战队极为关注的问题。目前，湿球黑球温度（WBGT）指数用于评估热损伤风险。该指数是干球温度（Tdb）、黑球温度（Tbg）和自然湿球温度（Tnwb）的加权平均值。如果能使用标准气象仪器来确定WBGT指数，它将会得到更广泛的应用。本研究比较了阿贡国家实验室的利耶格伦和美国陆军环境医学研究所的马修开发的模型，这两个模型都是利用标准气象测量数据来计算WBGT。两个模型都使用气温（Ta）、相对湿度、风速和全球太阳辐射（RG）来计算Tnwb和Tbg。用于模型验证的WBGT和气象数据是在佐治亚州的格里芬和亚利桑那州的尤马试验场收集的。利耶格伦（尤马试验场：R² = 0.709，p < 0.01；格里芬：R² = 0.854，p < 0.01）的计算结果与实际WBGT之间的一致性比马修（尤马试验场：R² = 0.630，p < 0.01；格里芬：R² = 0.677，p < 0.01）的更高。与实际WBGT热分类相比，马修模型相比于利耶格伦的分类往往会低估。结果表明，利耶格伦模型是直接测量WBGT的一个可接受的替代方法，但还需要在其他环境条件下进行验证。
