Article

Clothing and Textiles

Research Journal

Functional Design and Evaluation 2018, Vol. 36(3) 165-179

ª 2018 ITAA
Reprints and permission:
of Structural Firefighter Turnout sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0887302X18757348
Suits for Improved Thermal journals.sagepub.com/home/ctr

Comfort: Thermal Manikin

and Physiological Modeling

Meredith McQuerry1, Roger Barker2,

and Emiel DenHartog2

Abstract
Structural firefighter prototype designs incorporating ventilation, stretch, and modularity were
developed following Watkins’ functional design process. Prototypes were designed and manu-
factured, including single-layer, vented, stretch, and combination prototypes. Prototype garments
were evaluated for improved thermal comfort and heat loss using sweating thermal manikin
assessments in two conditions: static (standing still with no wind) and dynamic (walking with wind).
Raw thermal and evaporative resistance data from the manikin testing were input into a thermal
modeling software system (RadTherm®) and physiological responses (core temperature, skin
temperature, and sweat rate) were predicted for each prototype. A significant improvement in heat
loss was measured when ventilation openings and modularity were added to the design of the
clothing system. The single-layer, vented, and combination prototypes also had significantly lower
increases in predicted physiological responses.

Keywords
functional design, protective clothing, comfort, firefighter, heat loss

Thermal protection against heat and flame exposure in structural firefighter turnout suits is of utmost
priority. In recent years, manufacturers have met thermal protection requirements through the
addition of thicker materials and multiple reinforcement layers. While these additional materials
increase thermal protection, they contradict the wearer’s need for breathability and comfort. Cloth-
ing layers create both thermal and evaporative heat resistance, hindering the heat loss from the body
to the external environment. The inability of the body to maintain its thermoregulation (heat

1
Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA
2
North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC, USA

Corresponding Author:
Meredith McQuerry, Florida State University, 120 Convocation Way, 308 Sandels Building, Tallahassee, FL 32306, USA.
Email: mmcquerry@fsu.edu
166 Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 36(3)

balance) can lead to heat illness, which includes a spectrum of disorders due to environmental
exposure to heat. These conditions include fatigue, exhaustion, cramps, and heat stroke and can
ultimately be fatal. Heat strain (the body’s inability to disperse built-up internal heat) is a primary
cause of firefighter injuries and fatalities (Fahy, LeBlanc, & Molis, 2015; National Fire Protection
Association [NFPA], 2015; Rossi, 2001). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to reduce the risk
of heat strain by improving the physiological comfort of structural firefighter turnout suits. In order
to accomplish the purpose of this research, the following objectives were established:

1. to evaluate the prototype turnout suits for heat loss on a sweating thermal manikin,
2. to assess heat strain by predicting the wearer’s physiological comfort (core temperature, skin
temperature, and sweat rate [SR]) when wearing each turnout suit,
3. to determine whether significant improvements in thermal comfort exist among the prototype
turnout designs, compared to turnout suits on the market today (control).

Within this research study, we combined results and conclusions from previously explored design
modifications (clothing ventilation, reduced layering, modularity, and stretch materials) to create
innovative turnout suit prototypes that provide comfort performance above and beyond what is
currently on the market. The innovative nature of these prototypes is due to the novel design
modifications (ventilation openings, layer reductions, stretch membranes, etc.) that have not previ-
ously been explored in structural firefighter turnout suits. We utilized Watkins’ functional design
process when producing the structural firefighter turnout suit prototypes, similar to previous work
(Crown, Ackerman, Dale, & Tan, 1998; Tan, Crown, & Capjack, 1998; Watkins, 1984). In this
article, the evaluation and comparison of the heat loss and comfort properties of each prototype are
reported.

Review of Literature
Heat Stress in Structural Firefighter Turnouts
The human body is constantly working to achieve thermal homeostasis, in which a balance between
heat production and heat dissipation is required (Holmér, 2006). When restrictions to heat transfer
are imposed, such as heavier and bulkier garments, physical work requires more energy and pro-
duces greater metabolic heat (Holmér, 2006). For the body to maintain thermal homeostasis, it must
dispel this gain in metabolic heat.
The body’s primary mechanism for removing excess heat is sweat evaporation, which is reduced
by high humidity and lack of air movement when clothing is worn (Dukes-Dobos, Reischl, Buller,
Thomas, & Bernard, 1992; Reischl & Stransky, 1980b). When humans perform physical activity, the
body produces heat, which must escape in order to maintain a balanced internal core temperature. If
this heat cannot escape, heat strain, including fatigue, stroke, and even fatality, may occur. The
addition of clothing, especially multiple layers, creates air gaps within the clothing system that
further hinder the ability of sweat to evaporate to the outward environment.
A traditional firefighter turnout ensemble consists of a coat, pants, helmet, hood, self-contained
breathing apparatus (SCBA), gloves, and boots (McQuerry et al., 2016). The coat and pants consist
of three component layers: a durable, protective outer shell that serves as the first line of defense for
the wearer against thermal exposure and other hazards; a thin inner layer known as the moisture
barrier, which prevents liquid penetration; and a thermal liner made of nonwoven batting that
provides the majority of the thermal protection within the clothing ensemble (McQuerry, 2016).
Activities performed by firefighters often involve carrying, pushing, pulling, holding, turning,
wielding, throwing, or lifting, all of which can lead to overexertion (Kurlick, 2012). Thermal
insulation provided by turnout suits on the market today far exceeds what is necessary for the
McQuerry et al. 167

majority of tasks firefighters perform. Excessive clothing insulation in the turnout suit creates a
negative impact on firefighter comfort between 80% and 90% of their working time (McQuerry
et al., 2015; Rossi, 2005).

Functional Design Process

Functional clothing can be defined as clothing “specifically engineered to deliver a pre-defined
performance or functionality to the user, over and above its normal functions” (Gupta, 2011, p.
321). According to Watkins (1984), clothing is our most intimate environment, and it is one of
portability that we carry with us everywhere (Watkins, 1984). One category of functional clothing
is that which serves to provide a protective purpose from physical harm or hazards (Easter, 1994).
Structural firefighter turnout suits are an example of functional clothing that exists to protect the
user during firefighting activities. In order to develop the prototypes in this study, the researchers
used Watkins’ functional design process (Watkins, 1984). Within the functional design process,
multiple aspects must be considered, including (a) function, (b) structure, and (c) aesthetics
(Easter, 1994). Function, however, is the most important factor, as aesthetics are meaningless if
the garment does not function properly.
Functional design involves a process in which the designer goes step by step, from an initial
design idea all the way to evaluating the final design prototype (Watkins, 1984). Most functional
design processes follow similar frameworks in which the design request is made, the design situation
is explored, the problem structure is perceived, specifications are described, design criteria are
established, the prototypes are developed, and finally, the design of the prototypes is evaluated
(Orlando, 1979; Rosenblad-Wallin, 1985; Watkins, 1984).
Few researchers have addressed the complex issue of holistic structural firefighter turnout suit
design. While Reischl and Stransky (1980a, 1982) first explored ventilation and improved comfort
in turnout gear, little has been done since to improve the physiological comfort of structural fire-
fighters (Reischl & Stransky, 1980a; Reischl et al., 1982). To the authors’ knowledge, other
researchers have not investigated stretch materials, strategic layer reductions, or modular systems
applied to structural firefighter turnout gear. However, for protective clothing, garment design
improvements and fabrication changes are necessary in order to increase the amount of heat loss
while maintaining protection (Reischl et al., 1982).

Method
Structural firefighter turnout suit prototypes were developed by the research team and manufactured
by an industry partner before being evaluated for heat loss and physiological comfort. Four unique
prototypes were fabricated by modifying the original design of a control turnout suit. Modifications
included reduced garment layers, ventilation openings, stretch materials, and a combination of
design modifications. Prototypes were tested on the garment level to predict total heat loss (THL)
when worn on the three-dimensional human form. Raw thermal and evaporative resistance data
taken from the sweating thermal manikin testing were used to predict the core temperature, skin
temperature, and SR of firefighters when wearing each prototype under specified environmental and
exercise conditions. The detailed design of each prototype, test procedures, and statistical analysis
methods are discussed in this section.

Sample
A turnout suit representative of designs currently on the market today was chosen as the control suit
in this study. Design modifications for improving heat loss and thermal comfort were then
168 Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 36(3)

Table 1. Structural Firefighter Turnout Prototypes.

Prototype Description NFPA TPP Compliance

Control Turnout suit without modifications Yes

Single layer prototype Outer shell only No
Vented prototype Zipper vents Yes
Stretch prototype Stretch material panels with tapered athletic fit Yes
Revolutionary prototype Vented þ stretch þ reduced thermal liner layer in torso No
Note. NFPA ¼ National Fire Protection Association; TPP ¼ thermal protective performance.

considered, including ventilation openings, a modular layering system, stretch materials, and stra-
tegically reduced reinforcements. These modifications were fabricated into structural firefighter
turnout suits to create four unique prototypes. All base composite (outer shell, moisture barrier,
and thermal liner) materials were held constant except for the addition of a stretch moisture barrier
and flame-resistant (FR) knit fleece material in select prototypes. A single-layer outer shell proto-
type for Urban Search and Rescue operations and other normal working conditions outside of a
structural fire was produced. A ventilation prototype that incorporated active ventilation openings in
the outer seams of the turnout coat and pants was created. A stretch prototype was designed with
reduced insulation and air gaps by incorporating novel stretch materials (membrane and FR fleece)
in specific areas of the garment. Finally, a combination prototype was manufactured which incor-
porated ventilation openings, stretch panels, and reduced thermal liner batting. Specific design
features and details of each individual prototype are described in detail below and summarized
in Table 1.

Control turnout suit. A standard turnout suit found on the market today, without modifications, was
used throughout the research study as the control (Figure 1). All prototypes were fabricated from the
base model control turnout suit, with clothing modifications implemented into the original pattern
design. All suits were constructed with the same base composite materials detailed in Table 2.

Single-layer prototype. Previous researchers found a statistically significant improvement in heat loss
when the traditional three-layer turnout suit was reduced to one outer shell layer (McQuerry, 2016;
McQuerry, DenHartog, & Barker, 2016a). Based upon this experimental data, the research team
chose to produce a single layer modular prototype that consists of the outer shell layer only. This
concept did not require any additional fabrication to the control, as the moisture barrier and thermal
liner system were easily detached from the outer shell layer. This prototype suit could be worn in
working conditions where the threat of thermal exposure was not present and protection from
harmful liquids or chemicals was not necessary, such as a search and rescue operation.

Vented prototype. The remaining three prototype designs are illustrated in Figure 2: the vented,
stretch, and combination prototypes. The vented prototype was a combination of active ventilation
openings placed throughout the turnout suit, as these openings demonstrated statistically significant
improvements in heat loss when tested previously (McQuerry, DenHartog, & Barker, 2016b).
Selection and placement of these vents were based on location of reinforcements, equipment
(self-contained breathing apparatus) worn on top of the turnout suit, and body sweat mapping studies
(McQuerry et al., 2016).
Ventilation openings were sewn through all three layers of the turnout suit, along the outer side
seams of both the coat and pants (Figure 2). In the turnout coat, the vents extended from the elbow
patch on the sleeve of each arm, to the armpit, and down the vertical side seam. In the pants, the
McQuerry et al. 169

Figure 1. Control structural firefighter turnout suit.

Table 2. Turnout Suit Base Composite Materials.

Garment Layer Material Structure

Outer shell PBI Matrix 60% Para-Aramid/40% PBI

Moisture barrier PTFE Laminate Aramid
Thermal liner 2 Layer E89 100% Aramid Quilt

vents may be unzipped down the length of the outer pant side seam. A modification to the pant
pocket design was made to accommodate vertical zippers along the outer side seams.

Stretch prototype. The stretch prototype was the only prototype developed with the design priority of
improving mobility and ergonomics. Increasing mobility has the potential to indirectly improve
physiological comfort by reducing the amount of energy required by the body to perform the work,
leading to reduced metabolic heat production. In the stretch prototype, researchers incorporated
170 Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 36(3)

Figure 2. Vented, stretch, and combination structural firefighter turnout suit prototypes.

three-layer panels of stretch fabric into the turnout coat and pants, as illustrated in Figure 2. The
material components of the stretch panels consisted of a 100% Nomex IIIA single-sided knit fleece
fabric with one-way stretch, placed in the horizontal direction of the garment. The knit fleece was
incorporated as a material substitute in the outer shell and thermal liner layers. A proprietary stretch
membrane (moisture barrier) was placed in the middle of the three-layer component, between the
fleece layers, to serve as a barrier against moisture. Fabric-level testing was conducted to confirm
the three-layer stretch panel materials met the minimum NFPA requirements for thermal protective
performance (TPP).
Stretch panels were placed in the underarm, middle back, and inner pant seam regions. After the
first sample prototype was received, an additional stretch panel was added to the pant gusset for
increased range of motion when squatting and crawling. A tapered, athletic fit was incorporated into
the pattern design by taking two inches off the overall dimensions of the coat and pant side seams.
This modification was made to further reduce the air gap volume, which reduces clothing insulation
(Havenith, 1999), and to engage the stretch panels for improved mobility.

Combination prototype. The combination prototype included a combination of the venting and stretch
prototype designs along with a reduced thermal liner in the torso region of the coat (Figure 2). Zipper
vents were incorporated in the same locations as the vented prototype: around the stretch panels in
the coat and in the outer seams of the pants. Thermal liner nonwoven batting layers were removed
in the front and back of the coat torso only, leaving the facecloth layer of the thermal liner for skin
friction purposes. Fabric-level TPP testing was conducted on the base composite with a reduced
thermal liner. In order to meet the minimum NFPA requirement for TPP, however, a flame-retardant
T-shirt or station wear shirt would need to be considered as part of the turnout ensemble; therefore,
this prototype would not meet the current NFPA standard for TPP performance.
McQuerry et al. 171

Procedures
Sweating thermal manikin heat loss. Prototype suits were assessed individually for thermal resistance,
evaporative resistance, and overall THL using a sweating thermal manikin. Testing was conducted
according to ASTM F1291-10 Standard Test Method for Measuring the Thermal Insulation of
Clothing Using a Heated Manikin and ASTM F2370-10 Standard Test Method for Measuring the
Evaporative Resistance of Clothing Using a Sweating Manikin (American Society for Testing and
Materials, 2015a, 2015b). Manikin measurements were conducted in a controlled environmental
chamber at 23 C/50% relative humidity (RH) environment for thermal resistance and at 35 C/40%
RH environment for evaporative resistance (Ross, Barker, & Deaton, 2012).
Because manikin THL calculations are based upon measurements taken in two different envir-
onments, heat loss values are predictive rather than actual measurements (Ross et al., 2012). Manikin
THL (Qt) was predicted in a 35 C/35% RH environment, based on the thermal and evaporative
resistance (Rt and Ret) measurements from the sweating manikin, according to Equation 1 (Ross
et al., 2012). These environmental conditions were chosen for the manikin THL predictions because
they simulate real work conditions of the firefighter, particularly during a hot, dry summer day.
Ts  Ta Ps  Pa
Qtðpredicted;T;RHÞ ¼ þ ; ð1Þ
Rt Ret
where Q t (predicted, T, RH) ¼ predicted manikin THL for specified environmental
conditions (W/m2)
T ¼ specified temperature condition ( C)
RH ¼ specified relative humidity (%)
Ts ¼ specified temperature at the manikin surface ( C)
Ta ¼ specified temperature of the local environment ( C)
Ps ¼ calculated water vapor pressure at the surface of the manikin (kPa)
Pa ¼ calculated water vapor pressure in the specified local environment (kPa)
Rt ¼ thermal resistance of the clothing ensemble and surface air layer ( Cm2/W)
Ret ¼ evaporative resistance of the test ensemble and surface air layer (kPam2/W) (McCullough,
Jones, & Huck, 1985; Ross et al., 2012).
One control and four prototype turnout suits were tested with the same ensemble elements,
including boots, gloves, and a helmet. The manikin was dressed in 100% cotton base layers,
including a T-shirt, athletic shorts, and socks. Each prototype was tested in two conditions: static
(standing with still air speed at 0.4 m/s) and dynamic (walking with wind at 2 m/s). Three replicates
were taken for each prototype in each condition for both dry and wet heat loss (Rt and Ret). The same
prototype suit was tested with each replicate, but the manikin was fully undressed and redressed in
between, per standard test method procedures (ASTM F1291 and ASTM F2370).

Human thermal modeling. Thermoregulation modeling was used to determine predicted physiological
responses when wearing each prototype under specified environmental conditions. RadTherm®
modeling software, created by ThermoAnalytics®, allowed researchers to conduct such predictions.
The human thermal model provides tools to improve clothing uniform and design by evaluating
human comfort under various scenarios (ThermoAnalytics, 2018).
The modeling system incorporates multiple technologies to predict the skin, core body, and
clothing temperatures of differently sized humans, based upon height, weight, and ethnicity (Ther-
moAnalytics, 2018). To determine the predicted core temperature, skin temperature, and SR
responses when wearing each firefighter turnout suit prototype, the raw thermal insulation and
evaporative resistance data from each test condition (static and dynamic) were modeled for the
50th percentile human Caucasian male. The modeling protocol included environmental conditions
172 Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 36(3)

of 35 C/35% relative humidity, activity length of 100 min (20 min of standing followed by 5 min of
sitting for four cycles), and a work rate of five metabolic equivalent tasks (METS), to simulate
nonfirefighting working conditions.

Statistical Analysis
Raw thermal resistance and evaporative resistance data were used to calculate the predicted THL in
both test conditions (static and dynamic). To determine the statistical significance of the measured
differences between prototypes for the predicted manikin THL results, two-sample t tests, assuming
equal variances, were performed. Results were analyzed first for normal distributions, and a one-way
analysis of variance determined all sets of data in this study showed significant differences. There-
fore, individual t tests were conducted comparing each prototype. A p value of less than .05 was
chosen to indicate a significant difference in manikin THL. For the modeling data, predicted core
temperature, skin temperature, and SR results existed for the entire length of the protocol period (100
min). Only end point data (at the end of the protocol) were analyzed. Statistical significance for
virtual heat strain modeling was determined by analyzing if each data point fell within 2 standard
deviations of the sample mean. This method of determining statistical significance was limited by
the lack of repeated measures inherent to the modeling methodology.

Results and Discussion

Thermal Manikin Evaluation
Heat loss results for the structural firefighter turnout suit prototypes were predicted in a 35 C/35%
RH environment. Predictions in this environment represent real-life conditions a firefighter would
be exposed to, particularly during a hot, dry summer day during normal working conditions (outside
of a structural fire). The manikin THL in the (a) static and (b) dynamic test conditions is illustrated in
Figure 3. It should be noted that in a 35 C environment, the air temperature is the same as the body’s
skin temperature, and therefore no dry or convective heat loss is able to occur. Under these predicted
environmental conditions, the heat loss measured is due to sweat evaporation. If significant improve-
ments in heat loss can be measured under these extreme heat conditions, even greater improvements
could potentially be measured when both dry and convective heat loss occur.
Predicted manikin THL results of the prototype turnout suits in the 35 C/35% RH environment
demonstrate pronounced, significant differences compared to the control turnout suit. The heat loss
results reported are due to wet heat loss, as dry, convective heat loss is not possible under isothermal
conditions such as these, when the skin temperature and air temperature are the same. Instead, the
heat loss measured is through sweat evaporation only, which is the body’s last resort for removing
heat to the external environment via sweat.
The researchers found that the single-layer, vented, and combination prototypes demonstrated
statistically significant improvements in heat loss in both static and dynamic test conditions (p <
.05). Overall, THL values are lower for all suits in the static condition compared to the dynamic
condition due to a lack of forced convection through body motion and wind. Differences between
suits, however, are still prominent and significant. The single-layer prototype had the greatest heat
loss in the static test condition, followed by the combination and vented prototypes. The stretch
prototype had a slightly higher THL value (þ3.6 W/m2) than the control in this condition, but it was
not found to be statistically significant. The stretch prototype design implemented three-layer stretch
panels for a tighter fit to reduce the clothing insulation and improve mobility. The stretch materials,
however, had a lower heat loss value on the material level and lower air permeability than the
traditional base composite materials, contributing to the lack of improvement in heat loss compared
to the control.
McQuerry et al. 173

Figure 3. Predicted (a) static and (b) dynamic manikin total heat loss of prototypes in a 35 C/35% relative
humidity environment.

In the dynamic condition, the combination prototype had the highest THL (191.5 W/m2), fol-
lowed by the vented (190.2 W/m2) and single-layer prototypes (177.5 W/m2). The combination
prototype was a combination of the vent and stretch prototype designs. It included the active vent
openings plus the stretch material panels. However, performance of the stretch prototype indicated
no improvement in heat loss, whereas the vent prototype indicated significant improvement in heat
loss. Therefore, the significant increase in heat loss measured in the combination prototype can be
attributed to the vent features of the design, along with the reduced thermal liner layers, and is not
due to the stretch panels.
While the single-layer prototype led to significant improvements in heat loss, the results were not
as pronounced as the increase due to ventilation openings placed in the vented and combination
prototypes. The reduction in clothing insulation to a single air-permeable layer improved THL by
over 50 W/m2 in the dynamic condition, compared to a 65 W/m2 increase when ventilation openings
were implemented in the prototype design. These increases in THL are not only statistically signif-
icant but should be meaningful for the physiological comfort of the wearer as well. To determine if
such an improvement in wearer comfort might exist, human thermal modeling was used to predict
the physiological responses when wearing each prototype.

Predicted Physiological Responses

Virtual human thermal modeling was used as a tool for bridging the gap between the heat loss
measured on the sweating thermal manikin and a full human wear trial, as wear trials are not always
174 Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 36(3)

Table 3. Prototype Predictive Modeling Physiological Results.

Condition Suit Tthy ( C) Tsk ( C) SR (g/min)

Static Control 42.12 41.58 30

Single layer 40.69 39.98 30
Venting 41.16 40.51 30
Stretch 41.92 41.37 30
Revolutionary 40.97 40.31 30
Dynamic Control 39.13 38.06 30
Single layer 38.01 36.3 14.22
Venting 38.15 36.64 17.07
Stretch 39.52 38.59 30
Revolutionary 38.09 36.52 15.93
Note. SR ¼ sweat rate.

cost-feasible or within the scope of the research. Raw thermal and evaporative resistance data for
each prototype were input into the RadTherm (Version 11.2) software to predict core temperature
(Tthy), skin temperature (Tsk), and SR under the specified protocol. The predicted physiological
responses from virtual modeling of the prototypes are given in Table 3. The data points given in
the table reflect end point, total body average results at the completion of the 100-min protocol.

Core temperature. The body’s core temperature must be regulated within a narrow range to maintain
homeostasis at 37 C. An increase by just 1 C, to 38 C, can lead to heat illness symptoms such as
fatigue, cramps, and exhaustion (Teunissen et al., 2012). Therefore, a reduction in core temperature
of 0.5–1 C, or greater, should have a positive impact on the wearer’s comfort. Predicted differences
in core temperature (Tthy) were greatest between the control and single-layer prototype, with a drop
of 1.43 C measured when using the static manikin data to predict the results. A similar reduction was
found in the dynamic condition, with the single-layer prototype leading to a predicted core tem-
perature that was 1.12 C lower than the control. The combination and vented prototypes were also
predicted to lead to meaningful reductions in the wearer’s core temperature when using the static and
dynamic condition data to run the model. The combination suit was predicted to have a 1.15 C and a
1.04 C reduction in the rise of core body temperature compared to the control when using the static
and dynamic data, respectively. A 0.96 C (static) and 0.98 C (dynamic) drop in predicted Tthy was
measured for the vented prototype compared to the control turnout.
For the stretch prototype, the predicted core temperature was less than the predicted core tem-
perature of the control by only 0.2 C when using the static data. For the dynamic data predictions,
the stretch prototype actually had a higher predicted core temperature than all of the suits, including
the control, at 39.5 C. The stretch prototype’s lack of improvement according to the predicted
physiological responses reflects the stretch prototype’s poor performance in improving heat loss
on the sweating thermal manikin as well. Improvements in ergonomic function and range of motion
were the first priority for the stretch prototype design, as it did not incorporate any modifications for
direct heat loss improvement. While the stretch membrane and knit fleece materials were added to
improve range of motion, they provided more resistance for heat transfer from the clothing micro-
climate to the external environment. The stretch prototype does have the potential, however, to
reduce metabolic heat production by making it easier for the wearer to move with fewer restrictions.
The reduced effort required to move might in turn reduce metabolic heat generation. Further
ergonomic and range of motion testing is necessary on the human wear level to determine the full
impact of the stretch prototype on wearer mobility.
McQuerry et al. 175

Figure 4. Predicted (a) core temperature (Tthy), (b) skin temperature (Tsk), and (c) sweat rate of the turnout
suits using dynamic manikin data.

In Figure 4a, the predicted core body temperature of each suit over the 100-min protocol is
illustrated. This graph depicts the increase in predicted core temperature during the 20-min work
cycles, at five METS, followed by brief dips, or reductions, due to the 5-min rest cycle in between
work. Differences between suits became more pronounced around 30 min into the protocol, which
corresponds to 5 min into the second work cycle. Through these results, it is demonstrated that the
stretch prototype has the highest predicted core temperature of all suits tested, including the control.

Skin temperature. Differences between suits may be more pronounced when examining skin tem-
perature as a parameter for physiological comfort compared to core temperature. Thermal equili-
brium is maintained at a skin temperature of approximately 33 C (Wenger et al., 2001) but may
fluctuate in a larger range than core temperature as it regulates the wearer’s comfort and is affected
by environmental conditions (Havenith, 1999). In Figure 4b, the average predicted skin temperature
for each prototype using the dynamic manikin data is depicted. Compared to the predicted core
temperature results, similar trends were found for predicted skin temperature (Tsk) as the stretch
176 Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 36(3)

prototype resulted in the highest Tsk, followed by the control, vented, combination, and single-layer
prototypes. At the end of the 100-min protocol, the vented, combination, and single-layer prototypes
had similar predicted skin temperatures (36.3–36.6 C), which were 1.8–2 C lower than the control
and stretch prototype (38.1–38.6 C).

Sweat rate. Finally, sweat rates were predicted and analyzed for differences between suits (Figure
4c). In the static condition, all suits were predicted to reach the maximum sweat rate of 30 g/min
between 40 and 50 min into the protocol. When the more realistic dynamic condition data were used
to model the predicted sweat rates, only the control and stretch prototypes reached the maximum
sweat rate. The single-layer prototype had the lowest predicted sweat rate, 14.2 g/min, at the end of
the protocol. The vented and combination prototypes had meaningful reductions in predicted sweat
rate, compared to the control, of 17.1 g/min and 15.9 g/min, respectively.
Statistically significant differences between the modeled data were not found; however, this
analysis was limited by the inherent nature of the modeled data, which does not allow for repeated
measures. Instead, meaningful differences for each parameter (core temperature, skin temperature,
and sweat rate) were considered by assessing the body’s tolerance or fluctuation range. For all three
modeled parameters (core temperature, skin temperature, and sweat rate), researchers found the
single-layer, combination, and vented prototypes demonstrated meaningful improvements in phy-
siological comfort compared to the control. The stretch prototype, especially when modeled using
the dynamic condition data, did not indicate any benefit toward reducing heat strain.

Conclusion
Design modifications explored in this study had significant effects on the heat loss of the prototype
garments and the predicted physiological comfort of the wearer. Ventilation openings and reduced
garment layers led to increased heat loss for the single-layer, vented, and combination prototypes.
The stretch prototype, however, did not exhibit any significant benefits for heat loss or thermal
comfort improvements. The performance of the stretch prototype is most likely due to the low
breathability of the stretch materials that were incorporated. The stretch turnout suit was an ergo-
nomically designed prototype for improving mobility. The goal of this suit design was to reduce the
amount of metabolic heat produced by the body when performing physical tasks such as pulling,
crawling, kneeling, and climbing by making it easier to move in the garment.
The findings of this study are original and valuable to the personal protective clothing industry.
To the authors’ knowledge, previous researchers have not evaluated, on garment and human wear
levels, the impact on thermal comfort of such novel design changes to structural firefighter turnout
gear. Only two previous studies exist in which the authors explored ventilation openings in structural
turnout suits (Reischl & Stransky, 1980a; Reischl et al., 1982). The design modifications, novel
material, and full systems test methods utilized in this study make it original. Designers, product
developers, and manufacturers of protective clothing for first responders and firefighters will benefit
from this research. Further, results from this study will assist in educating firefighters on the
selection of their future personal protective clothing.

Gaps and Limitations

Limitations of this research include the limiting nature of the predictive modeling data and the lack
of full systems testing on the human wear level. While human thermal modeling can provide initial
insights into the predicted performance of the prototypes, it is not a substitute for physiological
comfort testing on the human body. Due to time and budget constraints, human wear trials and
thermal manikin testing cannot be performed in every condition. Using a human thermal model
McQuerry et al. 177

allows researchers to assess multiple environmental and exercise conditions in order to select the
most appropriate and realistic test conditions. Selection of conditions in this study was completed
with the intention to perform a wear trial as part of future research.
Another limitation was the addition of the stretch materials to the stretch prototype. All other
materials were held constant throughout the prototypes. The three-layer stretch panels were tested on
the fabric level prior to design implementation and compared to the traditional three-layer base
composite materials (Table 2). Unfortunately, the reduction in heat loss through the stretch panels
that was measured on the fabric level also impacted the prototype on the garment level (thermal
manikin testing) and the human level (predicted physiological responses). Results of the stretch
prototype provided the researchers with better insight into the influence of these novel stretch
materials on the human body as they were implemented in the context of this study.
Finally, a major hurdle to the implementation of this research is the gap between the findings and
current performance requirements mandated by NFPA standards. Revisions to the current standards
would be necessary in order to adopt a modular layering approach, incorporate ventilation, or reduce
layers in strategic areas. These modifications may increase the risk for burn injury if firefighters are
not properly trained on which layers to wear for specific conditions, when and where to “activate”
and close their vents, and so forth. However, this should not deter the progress of new innovations in
structural firefighter personal protective gear. With a large majority of firefighters suffering from
heat stress, a better optimization between protection and comfort must be considered.

Future Research
Future research should include physiological comfort testing on the human wear level to measure
and confirm human physiological responses (core temperature, skin temperature, sweat rate, and
heart rate) when wearing each prototype under similar conditions as were modeled in this study. In
addition, subjective thermal comfort evaluations should be conducted during the physiological wear
trial to determine the perceived comfort and thermal sensations when wearing each prototype.
Evaluations of the stretch prototype in a human ergonomic wear trial should also be performed,
as this suit was designed to improve mobility first and foremost. In addition, stretch materials that
provide greater breathability and heat transfer characteristics should be explored but are currently
limited by a lack of research and development in this area. The goal of the stretch prototype design
was to indirectly improve physiological comfort by making it easier for the firefighter to move
around, therefore reducing the amount of metabolic heat produced. The potential improvement in
ergonomics of the stretch prototype should be assessed through a wear trial that involves obstacles
and active movements to measure range of motion.

Authors’ Note
This research was conducted Florida State University in the College of Human Sciences and at North Carolina
State University in the College of Textiles, Textile Protection and Comfort Center (TPACC).

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or pub-
lication of this article.

Funding
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publica-
tion of this article: This work was supported by the Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, Fiscal Year 2012, Assistance to Firefighters Grant program, fire prevention and safety
(grant number EMW-2012-FP-01185).
178 Clothing and Textiles Research Journal 36(3)

References
American Society for Testing and Materials. (2015a). ASTM F1291 standard test method for measuring the
thermal insulation of clothing under a heated manikin. West Conshohocken, PA: Author.
American Society for Testing and Materials. (2015b). ASTM F2370 standard test method for measuring the
evaporative resistance of clothing using a sweating manikin. West Conshohocken, PA: Author.
Crown, E. M., Ackerman, M. Y., Dale, J. D., & Tan, Y. B. (1998). Design and evaluation of thermal protective
flightsuits. part ii: Instrumented mannequin evaluation. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 16, 79–87.
doi:10.1177/0887302X9801600203
Dukes-Dobos, F. N., Reischl, U., Buller, K., Thomas, N. T., & Bernard, T. E. (1992). Assessment of ventilation
of firefighter protective clothing. ASTM Performance of Protective Clothing, 4, 629–633.
Easter, E. P. (1994). Design of protective clothing. In M. Raheel (Ed.), Protective clothing systems and
materials (pp. 25–38). New York, NY: Marcel Dekker.
Fahy, R., LeBlanc, P., & Molis, J. (2015). Firefighter fatalities in the United States. NFPA research foundation.
Quincy, MA. Retrieved from http://www.nfpa.org/research/reports-and-statistics/the-fire-service/fatalities-
and-injuries/firefighter-fatalities-in-the-united-states
Gupta, D. (2011). Functional clothing—definition and classification. Indian Journal of Fibre and Textile
Research, 36, 321–326. Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b753/6eacf97c00eb3b7f46f822ba3
c3e134b3859.pdf
Havenith, G. (1999). Heat balance when wearing protective clothing. The Annals of Occupational Hygiene, 43,
289–296. doi:10.1093/annhyg/43.5.289
Holmér, I. (2006). Protective clothing in hot environments. Industrial Health, 44, 404–413. Retrieved from
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download? doi¼10.1.1.411.2373&rep¼rep1&type¼pdf
Kurlick, G. M. (2012). Stop, drop, and roll: Workplace hazards of local government firefighters, 2009.”
Monthly Labor Review, 134, 18–25. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2012/11/art2full.pdf
McCullough, E. A., Jones, B. W., & Huck, J. (1985). A comprehensive data base for estimating clothing
insulation. ASHRAE Transactions, 91, 29–47.
McQuerry, M. (2016). Clothing modifications for heat strain reduction in structural firefighter protective
clothing systems. (Doctoral dissertation, North Carolina State University). Retrieved from https://reposi
tory.lib.ncsu.edu/bitstream/handle/1840.16/11306/etd.pdf? sequence¼2&isAllowed¼y
McQuerry, M., Barker, R., Hummel, A., & Deaton, S. (2015). The cost of a pocket: How additional reinforce-
ments impact THL & TPP. Fire Engineering, 168, 78–79.
McQuerry, M., DenHartog, E., & Barker, R. (2016a). Evaluating turnout composite layering strategies for
reducing thermal burden in structural firefighter protective clothing systems. Textile Research Journal, 87,
1217–1225. doi:10.1177/0040517516651101
McQuerry, M., DenHartog, E., & Barker, R. (2016b). Garment ventilation strategies for improving heat loss in
structural firefighter clothing ensembles. AATCC Journal of Research, 3, 9–14. doi:10.14504/ajr.3.3.2
McQuerry, M., DenHartog, E., Barker, R., & Ross, K. (2016). A review of garment ventilation strategies for
structural firefighter protective clothing. Textile Research Journal, 86, 727–742. doi:10.1177/
0040517515595029
National Fire Protection Association. (2015). Trends in firefighter injuries. Quincy, MA. Retrieved from http://
www.nfpa.org/News-and-Research/Fire-statistics-and-reports/Fire-statistics/The-fire-service/Fatalities-
and-injuries/Firefighter-injuries-in-the-United-States
Orlando, J. Y. (1979). Objectifying apparel design. In Nelson, C.N. & Henry, N.W. (Ed.), Combined proceed-
ings, Eastern, central, and western regional meetings, association of college professors of textiles and
clothing, Inc (pp. 127–132). West Conshohocken, PA: Association of College Professors of Textiles and
Clothing.
Reischl, U., & Stransky, A. (1980a). Assessment of ventilation characteristics of standard and prototype fire-
fighter protective clothing. Textile Research Journal, 50, 193–201. doi:10.1177/004051758005000308
McQuerry et al. 179

Reischl, U., & Stransky, A. (1980b). Comparative assessment of Goretex ™ and Neoprene™ vapor barriers in a
firefighter turn-out coat. Textile Research Journal, 50, 643–647. doi:10.1177/004051758005001101
Reischl, U., Stransky, A., Delorme, H. R., & Travis, R. (1982). Advanced prototype firefighter protective
clothing: Heat dissipation characteristics. Textile Research Journal, 52, 66–73. doi:10.1177/
004051758205200110
Rosenblad-Wallin, E. (1985). User-oriented product development applied to functional clothing design.
Applied Ergonomics, 16, 279–287. doi:10.1016/0003-6870(85)90092-4
Ross, K., Barker, R., & Deaton, A. S. (2012). Translation between heat loss measured using guarded sweating
hot plate, sweating manikin, and physiologically assessed heat stress of firefighter turnout ensembles.
In A. M. ShepherdPerformance of protective clothing and equipment: Emerging issues and technologies
(pp. 27–47). West Conshohocken, PA: ASTM International. doi:10.1520/STP104510
Rossi, R. (2001, July). Firefighters’ protective clothing: the choice between protection and comfort. The
International Textile Magazine, 40–45.
Rossi, R. (2005). New developments for firefighters’ protective clothing. Technical Textiles, 48, 1–4.
Tan, Y. B., Crown, E. M., & Capjack, L. (1998). Design and evaluation of thermal protective flightsuits part I:
The design process and prototype development. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 16, 47–55. doi:10.
1177/0887302X9801600106
Teunissen, L. P. J., de Haan, A., de Koning, J. J., & Daanen, H. A. M. (2012). Telemetry pill versus rectal and
esophageal temperature during extreme rates of exercise-induced core temperature change. Physiological
Measurement, 33, 915–924. doi:10.1088/0967-3334/33/6/915
ThermoAnalytics. (2018). Human simulation. Thermoanalytics. Retrieved from http://www.thermoanalytics.
com/services/human-simulation/thermal-comfort
Watkins, S. M. (1984). Clothing the Portable Environment (1st ed.). Des Moines: The Iowa State University
Press.
Wenger, C. B., Sawka, M. N., Pandolf, K. B., Johnson, R. F., Kobrick, J. L., Gaffin, S. L., Hubbard, R.W.,
Nunneley, S.A., & Reardon, M. J. (2001). Medical aspects of harsh environments (Vol. 1). Washington, DC:
Office of the Surgeon General at TMM.

Author Biographies
Meredith McQuerry, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Retail, Merchandising, and Product Development
Department at Florida State University. Her research primarily focuses on the physiological comfort and
ergonomic mobility of protective clothing. A large portion of her work has been applied to firefighter protective
clothing systems, using the functional design process to engineer a better performing garment.
Roger Barker is the Burlington Chair in textile technology professor and director of the Textile Protection and
Comfort Center (TPACC) in the College of Textiles at North Carolina State University. He is internationally
recognized for his work in the field of thermal protective clothing and heat stress in clothing systems.
Emiel DenHartog, PhD, is an associate professor and codirector of the Textile Protection and Comfort Center
(TPACC) in the College of Textiles at North Carolina State University. His primary research interest is to
optimize human performance in protective clothing systems by combining science, engineering, and textile
material performance measures with human factors.