An overt chemical protective garment reduces thermal strain compared with a covert garment in warm-wet but not hot-dry environments
Cast your vote
You can rate an item by clicking the amount of stars they wish to award to this item.
When enough users have cast their vote on this item, the average rating will also be shown.
Your vote was cast
Thank you for your feedback
Thank you for your feedback
MetadataShow full item record
Abstract© 2017 Maley, Costello, Borg, Bach, Hunt and Stewart. Objectives: A commercial chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) protective covert garment has recently been developed with the aim of reducing thermal strain. A covert CBRN protective layer can be worn under other clothing, with equipment added for full chemical protection when needed. However, it is unknown whether the covert garment offers any alleviation to thermal strain during work compared with a traditional overt ensemble. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare thermal strain and work tolerance times during work in an overt and covert ensemble offering the same level of CBRN protection. Methods: Eleven male participants wore an overt (OVERT) or covert (COVERT) CBRN ensemble and walked (4 km·h-1, 1% grade) for a maximum of 120 min in either a wet bulb globe temperature [WBGT] of 21, 30, or 37°C (Neutral, WarmWet and HotDry, respectively). The trials were ceased if the participants' gastrointestinal temperature reached 39°C, heart rate reached 90% of maximum, walking time reached 120 min or due to self-termination. Results: All participants completed 120 min of walking in Neutral. Work tolerance time was greater in OVERT compared with COVERT in WarmWet (P < 0.001, 116.5[9.9] vs. 88.9[12.2] min, respectively), though this order was reversed in HotDry (P = 0.003, 37.3[5.3] vs. 48.4[4.6] min, respectively). The rate of change in mean body temperature and mean skin temperature was greater in COVERT (0.025[0.004] and 0.045[0.010]°C·min-1, respectively) compared with OVERT (0.014[0.004] and 0.027[0.007]°C·min-1, respectively) in WarmWet (P < 0.001 and P = 0.028, respectively). However, the rate of change in mean body temperature and mean skin temperature was greater in OVERT (0.068[0.010] and 0.170[0.026]°C·min-1, respectively) compared with COVERT (0.059[0.004] and 0.120[0.017]°C·min-1, respectively) in HotDry (P = 0.002 and P < 0.001, respectively). Thermal sensation, thermal comfort, and ratings of perceived exertion did not differ between garments at trial cessation (P > 0.05). Conclusion: Those dressed in OVERT experienced lower thermal strain and longer work tolerance times compared with COVERT in a warm-wet environment. However, COVERT may be an optimal choice in a hot-dry environment. These findings have practical implications for those making decisions on the choice of CBRN ensemble to be used during work.
CitationMaley, M.J., Costello, J.T., Borg, D.N., Bach, A.J.E., Hunt, A.P. and Stewart, I.B. (2017) An overt chemical protective garment reduces thermal strain compared with a covert garment in warm-wet but not hot-dry environments Frontiers in Physiology, 8:913. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2017.00913
JournalFrontiers in Physiology
Description© 2017 The Authors. Published by Frontiers Media. This is an open access article available under a Creative Commons licence. The published version can be accessed at the following link on the publisher’s website: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2017.00913
SponsorsThis project is financially supported by the Australian Government, managed by the National Security Science and Technology Centre within the Defence Science and Technology Organization, and the US Government through the Technical Support Working Group within the Combating Terrorism Technical Support Office.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Licence for published version: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
- Inside the 'Hurt Locker': The Combined Effects of Explosive Ordnance Disposal and Chemical Protective Clothing on Physiological Tolerance Time in Extreme Environments.
- Authors: Costello JT, Stewart KL, Stewart IB
- Issue date: 2015 Aug
- Can perceptual indices estimate physiological strain across a range of environments and metabolic workloads when wearing explosive ordnance disposal and chemical protective clothing?
- Authors: Borg DN, Stewart IB, Costello JT
- Issue date: 2015 Aug 1
- Perceived exertion is as effective as the perceptual strain index in predicting physiological strain when wearing personal protective clothing.
- Authors: Borg DN, Costello JT, Bach AJ, Stewart IB
- Issue date: 2017 Feb 1
- Heat strain evaluation of overt and covert body armour in a hot and humid environment.
- Authors: Pyke AJ, Costello JT, Stewart IB
- Issue date: 2015 Mar
- Effect of clothing layers in combination with fire fighting personal protective clothing on physiological and perceptual responses to intermittent work and on materials performance test results.
- Authors: Smith DL, Haller JM, Hultquist EM, Lefferts WK, Fehling PC
- Issue date: 2013