Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The effectiveness of intermittent, microclimate cooling for men who worked in US Army chemical protective clothing (modified mission-oriented protective posture level 3; MOPP 3) was examined. The hypothesis was that intermittent cooling on a 2 min on-off schedule using a liquid cooling garment (LCG) covering 72% of the body surface area would reduce heat strain comparably to constant cooling. Four male subjects completed three experiments at 30 degrees C, 30% relative humidity wearing the LCG under the MOPP 3 during 80 min of treadmill walking at 224 +/- 5 W . m(-2). Water temperature to the LCG was held constant at 21 degrees C. The experiments were; 1) constant cooling (CC); 2) intermittent cooling at 2-min intervals (IC); 3) no cooling (NC). Core temperature increased (1.6 +/- 0.2 degrees C) in NC, which was greater than IC (0.5 +/- 0.2 degrees C) and CC (0.5 +/- 0.3 degrees C) ( p < 0.05). Mean skin temperature was higher during NC (36.1 +/- 0.4 degrees C) than IC (33.7 +/- 0.6 degrees C) and CC (32.6 +/- 0.6 degrees C) and mean skin temperature was higher during IC than CC ( p < 0.05). Mean heart rate during NC (139 +/- 9 b . min(-1)) was greater than IC (110 +/- 10 b . min(-1)) and CC (107 +/- 9 b . min(-1)) ( p < 0.05). Cooling by conduction (K) during NC (94 +/- 4 W . m(-2)) was lower than IC (142 +/- 7 W . m(-2)) and CC (146 +/- 4 W . m(-2)) ( p < 0.05). These findings suggest that IC provided a favourable skin to LCG gradient for heat dissipation by conduction and reduced heat strain comparable to CC during exercise-heat stress in chemical protective clothing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cadarette et al. (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: