4.5 Article

Apparent latent heat of evaporation from clothing: attenuation and heat pipe effects

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSIOLOGY
卷 104, 期 1, 页码 142-149

出版社

AMER PHYSIOLOGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1152/japplphysiol.00612.2007

关键词

heat balance; sweat evaporation; condensation; protective clothing; evaporative cooling efficiency

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Investigating claims that a clothed person's mass loss does not always represent their evaporative heat loss (EVAP), a thermal manikin study was performed measuring heat balance components in more detail than human studies would permit. Using clothing with different levels of vapor permeability and measuring heat losses from skin controlled at 34 degrees C in ambient temperatures of 10, 20, and 34 degrees C with constant vapor pressure (1 kPa), additional heat losses from wet skin compared with dry skin were analyzed. EVAP based on mass loss (E-mass) measurement and direct measurement of the extra heat loss by the manikin due to wet skin (E-app) were compared. A clear discrepancy was observed. E-mass overestimated E-app in warm environments, and both under and overestimations were observed in cool environments, depending on the clothing vapor permeability. At 34 degrees C, apparent latent heat (lambda(app)) of pure evaporative cooling was lower than the physical value (lambda; 2,430 J/g) and reduced with increasing vapor resistance up to 45%. At lower temperatures, lambda(app) increases due to additional skin heat loss via evaporation of moisture that condenses inside the clothing, analogous to a heat pipe. For impermeable clothing, lambda(app) even exceeds lambda by four times that value at 10 degrees C. These findings demonstrate that the traditional way of calculating evaporative heat loss of a clothed person can lead to substantial errors, especially for clothing with low permeability, which can be positive or negative, depending on the climate and clothing type. The model presented explains human subject data on EVAP that previously seemed contradictive.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据