This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Markee, N.L. Articles by Woo, S.S. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

In Vivo Cutaneous and Perceived Comfort Response to Fabric

Part IV: Perceived Sensations to Three Experimental Garments Worn by Subjects Exercising in a Hot, Humid Environment'

University of Nevada at Reno, Reno, Nevada 89557, U.S.A.

K.L. Hatch

University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona 85721, U.S.A.

H.I. Maibach

University of California at San Francisco. San Francisco, California 94143, U.S.A.

R.L. Barker

North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, U.S.A.

P. Radhakrishnaiah

North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, U.S.A.

S.S. Woo

North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, U.S.A.

We report on the perceived comfort data collected while ten female subjects exercised in the hot, humid environment ( 29.4°C, 75% RH) wearing garments made from the three experimental knit fabrics. These findings are related to the fabric thermophys iological comfort data reported in Part I, the mechanical and surface related comfort data in Part II, and the skin alteration data in Part III of this series. At four times during the wear protocol (after acclimation, after 10 minutes of wear, after 40 minutes of exercise, and after 20 minutes of rest following exercise), subjects were asked to indicate overall comfort and thermal, wetness, and contact sensations. There was no difference between the fabrics for wetness or thermal sensation, a result explainable in terms of the extremely small differences in water and heat transport data reported in Part I. The thermal insulation, permeability index, and comfort limit values we calculated predict that differences in perceived thermal and wetness sensation should be minimal.

Skin temperature was a significant determinant of perceived thermal comfort in our regression model, but capillary blood flow was not. The regression model for wetness sensation showed that stratum corneum water content and evaporative water loss were statistically significant determinants. Use of wetness-related and contact sensation descriptors differed for the three experimental fabrics. Differences in the wetness-related descriptors appear related to the percent water uptake of the fabrics during exercise. Fiber denier and fabric mechanical and surface feature data were useful in explaining the difference in contact sensations. The fabrics differed in perceived overall comfort. In the regression analysis, capillary blood flow was the only physio logical factor with a statistically significant effect on overall comfort. We suspect a link between the mechanical and surface features and capillary blood flow.

Textile Research Journal, Vol. 60, No. 10, 561-568 (1990)
DOI: 10.1177/004051759006001002


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				K. L. Hatch, N. L. Markee, and H. I. Maibach Skin Response To Fabric. A Review of Studies and Assessment Methods Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, June 1, 1992; 10(4): 54 - 63. [Abstract] [PDF]