This research develops a dual-plate instrument to evaluate thermal conductivity in multi-layer fabrics under cold conditions, suggesting improvements for cold weather apparel.
Purpose In cold weather conditions, the thermal performance of multi-layered fabrics plays a critical role in maintaining comfort and safety. This study introduces a unique testing apparatus that has been designed and developed to evaluate the thermal characteristics of multi-layer fabrics specifically designed for extreme cold weather conditions. Design/methodology/approach The thermal conductivity measurement instrument employs a dual-plate methodology, incorporating precise procedures to replicate extreme cold conditions (down to −45°C) in the top zone using dry ice, while also establishing a regulated hot zone (bottom zone) that mimics human skin temperature (33°C) through the use of an electric heater and a proportional-integral-derivative (PID) temperature controller. Findings The experimental apparatus revealed consistent temperature fluctuations (±<0.5°C) and good thermal stability in the bottom zone during both short and long-duration testing periods. In the cold zone, the instrument effectively maintained lower temperature fluctuations (±<2°C) during shorter testing periods. However, because of rapid dry ice sublimation, extended testing durations showed larger temperature fluctuations (±˜5°C). Research limitations/implications These findings also demonstrate the limitations of dry ice as a cooling medium for extended periods of testing time. Practical implications This study aims to enhance the functioning of multi-layer fabrics, which are in demand for cold-weather clothing, based on the tested equipment. Originality/value Though several commercial testing devices and research models based on steady-state and non-steady-state (transient) approaches have been developed, there is still a significant gap in accurately simulating cold weather conditions when evaluating cold weather clothing, with the exception of the thermal manikin method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ahammed et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: