Teunissen Lennart P J, Wang Li-Chu, Chou Shih-Nung, Huang Chin-Hsien, Jou Gwo-Tsuen, Daanen Hein A M
TNO, PO Box 23, 3769 ZG Soesterberg, The Netherlands.
Taiwan Textile Research Institute, No. 6, Chengtian Rd., Tucheng Dist., New Taipei City 23674, Taiwan, ROC.
Appl Ergon. 2014 Nov;45(6):1433-8. doi: 10.1016/j.apergo.2014.04.008. Epub 2014 May 3.
Firemen often suffer from heat strain. This study investigated two chest cooling systems for use under a firefighting suit. In nine male subjects, a vest with water soaked cooling pads and a vest with water perfused tubes were compared to a control condition. Subjects performed 30 min walking and 10 min recovery in hot conditions, while physiological and perceptual parameters were measured. No differences were observed in heart rate and rectal temperature, but scapular skin temperature and fluid loss were lower using the perfused vest. Thermal sensation was cooler for the perfused vest than for the other conditions, while the cool pad vest felt initially cooler than control. However, comfort and RPE scores were similar. We conclude that the cooling effect of both tested systems, mainly providing a (temporally) cooler thermal sensation, was limited and did not meet the expectations.
消防员经常遭受热应激。本研究调查了两种用于消防服下的胸部冷却系统。在九名男性受试者中,将带有水浸冷却垫的背心和带有水灌注管的背心与对照条件进行了比较。受试者在炎热条件下进行30分钟的步行和10分钟的恢复,同时测量生理和感知参数。心率和直肠温度未观察到差异,但使用灌注背心时肩胛皮肤温度和液体流失较低。灌注背心的热感觉比其他条件下更凉爽,而冷却垫背心最初感觉比对照更凉爽。然而,舒适度和主观用力程度评分相似。我们得出结论,两种测试系统的冷却效果主要是提供(暂时)更凉爽的热感觉,是有限的,没有达到预期。