Limits...
Protecting aircrew from cold stress elevates heat stress

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML

AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED EXCERPT
Please rate it.

Aircrew need to wear an immersion suit to protect against hypothermia in the unlikely event of crashing into cold water... The work duration until core body temperature rose from 37.0 °C to 38.5 °C was examined across a range of Wet-Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT) including: 23.6, 26.4, 26.9, 28.5, 29.5, 29.7, 31.1, 32.5, 33.0, and 36.5 °C... Additional undergarments increased the thermal resistance of the FLY and CWIS configurations (FLY-1: 0.234; FLY-2: 0.269, and FLY-3: 0.320; CWIS-1: 0.273; CWIS-2: 0.317; and CWIS-3: 0.334 °C.m.W)... The CWIS configurations had a distinctly higher evaporative resistance than the FLY configurations, which also increased with additional undergarments (FLY-1: 0.039; FLY-2: 0.043; FLY-3: 0.051; CWIS-1: 0.062; CWIS-2: 0.070; CWIS-3: 0.073 kPa.m.W)... Work duration in the WBGT range of 24-30 °C was much shorter for the CWIS compared to the FLY ensembles (Figure 1)... Alternatively, in the most oppressive conditions (WBGT 32.0-36.5 °C) the work duration was similar in either the FLY or CWIS configurations (Figure 1)... Protecting aircrew from hypothermia will elevate heat strain and restrict work duration in the WBGT range of 24-30 °C compared to wearing standard flight suits... However, in warmer conditions the choice of APCC had a negligible effect on work duration, which was highly restricted irrespective of the clothing worn... The decision to don immersion protective clothing to protect against hypothermia in the event of a crash into cold water must be balanced with the risk of elevated heat strain during flight.

No MeSH data available.


The time to body core temperature of 38.5 °C across a range in WBGT for each clothing configuration.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4580779&req=5

Figure 1: The time to body core temperature of 38.5 °C across a range in WBGT for each clothing configuration.

Mentions: Additional undergarments increased the thermal resistance of the FLY and CWIS configurations (FLY-1: 0.234; FLY-2: 0.269, and FLY-3: 0.320; CWIS-1: 0.273; CWIS-2: 0.317; and CWIS-3: 0.334 °C.m2.W-1). The CWIS configurations had a distinctly higher evaporative resistance than the FLY configurations, which also increased with additional undergarments (FLY-1: 0.039; FLY-2: 0.043; FLY-3: 0.051; CWIS-1: 0.062; CWIS-2: 0.070; CWIS-3: 0.073 kPa.m2.W-1). Work duration in the WBGT range of 24-30 °C was much shorter for the CWIS compared to the FLY ensembles (Figure 1). Alternatively, in the most oppressive conditions (WBGT 32.0-36.5 °C) the work duration was similar in either the FLY or CWIS configurations (Figure 1).


Protecting aircrew from cold stress elevates heat stress
The time to body core temperature of 38.5 °C across a range in WBGT for each clothing configuration.
© Copyright Policy - open-access
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License 1 - License 2
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4580779&req=5

Figure 1: The time to body core temperature of 38.5 °C across a range in WBGT for each clothing configuration.
Mentions: Additional undergarments increased the thermal resistance of the FLY and CWIS configurations (FLY-1: 0.234; FLY-2: 0.269, and FLY-3: 0.320; CWIS-1: 0.273; CWIS-2: 0.317; and CWIS-3: 0.334 °C.m2.W-1). The CWIS configurations had a distinctly higher evaporative resistance than the FLY configurations, which also increased with additional undergarments (FLY-1: 0.039; FLY-2: 0.043; FLY-3: 0.051; CWIS-1: 0.062; CWIS-2: 0.070; CWIS-3: 0.073 kPa.m2.W-1). Work duration in the WBGT range of 24-30 °C was much shorter for the CWIS compared to the FLY ensembles (Figure 1). Alternatively, in the most oppressive conditions (WBGT 32.0-36.5 °C) the work duration was similar in either the FLY or CWIS configurations (Figure 1).

View Article: PubMed Central - HTML

AUTOMATICALLY GENERATED EXCERPT
Please rate it.

Aircrew need to wear an immersion suit to protect against hypothermia in the unlikely event of crashing into cold water... The work duration until core body temperature rose from 37.0 °C to 38.5 °C was examined across a range of Wet-Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT) including: 23.6, 26.4, 26.9, 28.5, 29.5, 29.7, 31.1, 32.5, 33.0, and 36.5 °C... Additional undergarments increased the thermal resistance of the FLY and CWIS configurations (FLY-1: 0.234; FLY-2: 0.269, and FLY-3: 0.320; CWIS-1: 0.273; CWIS-2: 0.317; and CWIS-3: 0.334 °C.m.W)... The CWIS configurations had a distinctly higher evaporative resistance than the FLY configurations, which also increased with additional undergarments (FLY-1: 0.039; FLY-2: 0.043; FLY-3: 0.051; CWIS-1: 0.062; CWIS-2: 0.070; CWIS-3: 0.073 kPa.m.W)... Work duration in the WBGT range of 24-30 °C was much shorter for the CWIS compared to the FLY ensembles (Figure 1)... Alternatively, in the most oppressive conditions (WBGT 32.0-36.5 °C) the work duration was similar in either the FLY or CWIS configurations (Figure 1)... Protecting aircrew from hypothermia will elevate heat strain and restrict work duration in the WBGT range of 24-30 °C compared to wearing standard flight suits... However, in warmer conditions the choice of APCC had a negligible effect on work duration, which was highly restricted irrespective of the clothing worn... The decision to don immersion protective clothing to protect against hypothermia in the event of a crash into cold water must be balanced with the risk of elevated heat strain during flight.

No MeSH data available.