Energy cost of stepping in protective clothing ensembles

Duggan, Andrew

doi:10.1080/00140138808966645

Cited by 59 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, the nature of the clothing itself may alter the energy requirements of work, and this must be considered within the development, and by extension, the implementation of workplace tests, employment standards and cut-scores. Teitlebaum and Goldman (1972) evaluated the effects of multiple layers of heavy, cold-weather clothing on the energy cost of walking, as did Duggan (1988;stepping) and Dorman and Havenith (2009;walking, stepping, obstacle course). In each of those investigations, metabolic rate was elevated by 10%-15% when subjects wore the protective ensembles.…”

Section: Impact Of Clothing On the Energy Cost Of Locomotionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Load carriage, human performance, and employment standards

Taylor

Peoples

Petersen

2016

Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The focus of this review is on the physiological considerations necessary for developing employment standards within occupations that have a heavy reliance on load carriage. Employees within military, fire fighting, law enforcement, and search and rescue occupations regularly work with heavy loads. For example, soldiers often carry loads >50 kg, whilst structural firefighters wear 20-25 kg of protective clothing and equipment, in addition to carrying external loads. It has long been known that heavy loads modify gait, mobility, metabolic rate, and efficiency, while concurrently elevating the risk of muscle fatigue and injury. In addition, load carriage often occurs within environmentally stressful conditions, with protective ensembles adding to the thermal burden of the workplace. Indeed, physiological strain relates not just to the mass and dimensions of carried objects, but to how those loads are positioned on and around the body. Yet heavy loads must be borne by men and women of varying body size, and with the expectation that operational capability will not be impinged. This presents a recruitment conundrum. How do employers identify capable and injury-resistant individuals while simultaneously avoiding discriminatory selection practices? In this communication, the relevant metabolic, cardiopulmonary, and thermoregulatory consequences of loaded work are reviewed, along with concomitant impediments to physical endurance and mobility. Also emphasised is the importance of including occupation-specific clothing, protective equipment, and loads during work-performance testing. Finally, recommendations are presented for how to address these issues when evaluating readiness for duty.Key words: backpacks, firefighter, load carriage, oxygen cost, military, employment standards, ventilation, work of breathing.Résumé : Cette analyse documentaire traite principalement des aspects physiologiques essentiels à l'élaboration de normes d'emploi pour des postes dont la fonction majeure est le transport de charges. Les employés dans l'armée, les pompiers, la police, les membres de recherche et sauvetage travaillent régulièrement avec de lourdes charges. Par exemple, les soldats transportent souvent des charges de >50 kg et les pompiers de bâtiments portent un vêtement de protection pesant de 20 à 25 kg et déplacent aussi des charges externes. On sait depuis longtemps que le port de charges lourdes modifie la démarche, la mobilité, le taux métabolique et le rendement tout en augmentant le risque de fatigue musculaire et de blessure. De plus, le déplacement des charges est effectué fréquemment dans des conditions environnementales stressantes et les vêtements de protection accroissent la charge thermique dans cet endroit. En outre, la contrainte physiologique ne dépend pas seulement de la masse et des dimensions des objets à déplacer, mais aussi de leur positionnement sur et autour du corps. Pourtant, il faut que ces charges soient déplacées par des hommes et des femmes de gabarit divers dont les capacités opérationnell...

show abstract

Section: Impact Of Clothing On the Energy Cost Of Locomotionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Load carriage, human performance, and employment standards

Taylor

Peoples

Petersen

2016

Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Heavy clothing can cause an increase in energy expenditure of workers. Duggan (1988) 19) has reported that when workers wore clothing of 3 kg and 5 kg, the energy metabolism increased as much as 5% and 9%, respectively. Therefore, PCE for farm workers working in a squatting position for a long time, should be as light as possible.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Alleviation of Heat Strain by Cooling Different Body Areas during Red Pepper Harvest Work at WBGT 33℃

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The clothing (and other protective equipment, such as respirators and a self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA)) constitutes additional weight (from approximately 5 to 25 kg) that has to be carried and thus causes an increase in Ṁ and consequently in heat production (Goldman 1969;Smolander et al 1984). However, more than half of the observed increase in Ṁ because of clothing can be attributed to other factors, such as increased friction of movement and hobbling effects of the clothing, rather than solely to the added weight of the PCE (Dorman and Havenith 2009;Duggan 1988;Patton et al 1995;Teitlebaum and Goldman 1972). In addition, protective boots, for example, can have an impact on Ṁ that is greater than that because of simply their weight because of their effect on movement efficiency (see Taylor et al 2016, in this special issue).…”

Section: Protective Clothing and Metabolic Ratementioning

confidence: 96%

“…These differences were attributed to increased friction because of the interaction of the layers of clothing. Similarly, Duggan (1988) examined the effect of various combinations of the PCE on the energy cost of bench stepping. When corrected for the weight of the clothing, the oxygen uptake (V O 2 ), as a measure of energy cost, was greater by an average of 9% in the 4-layer ensemble compared with the single-layer control condition, which equated to approximately 3% per additional layer above the base condition.…”

Section: Protective Clothing and Metabolic Ratementioning

confidence: 99%

Protective clothing ensembles and physical employment standards

McLellan¹,

Havenith

2016

Appl. Physiol. Nutr. Metab.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Physical employment standards (PESs) exist for certain occupational groups that also require the use of protective clothing ensembles (PCEs) during their normal work. This review addresses whether these current PESs appropriately incorporate the physiological burden associated with wearing PCEs during respective tasks. Metabolic heat production increases because of wearing PCE; this increase is greater than that because of simply the weight of the clothing and can vary 2-fold among individuals. This variation negates a simple adjustment to the PES for the effect of the clothing on metabolic rate. As a result, PES testing that only simulates the weight of the clothing and protective equipment does not adequately accommodate this effect. The physiological heat strain associated with the use of PCEs is also not addressed with current PESs. Typically the selection tests of a PES lasts less than 20 min, whereas the requirement for use of PCE in the workplace may approach 1 h before cooling strategies can be employed. One option that might be considered is to construct a heat stress test that requires new recruits and incumbents to work for a predetermined duration while exposed to a warm environmental temperature while wearing the PCE.Key words: uncompensable heat stress, metabolic rate, aerobic fitness, body size, self-contained breathing apparatus, heat tolerance.Résumé : Des normes physiques relatives à l'emploi (« PESs ») s'appliquent pour certains groupes professionnels qui doivent aussi porter un équipement de protection (« PCEs ») durant leur travail normal. Cette analyse documentaire vérifie si les PES prennent bien en compte le fardeau physiologique associé au port du PCE au cours des diverses tâches. La production de chaleur métabolique augmente à cause du port du PCE; cette augmentation est plus grande que celle attribuable au poids seul des vêtements et peut varier du double entre les individus. Cette variation annule la simple conformité aux PES en ce qui concerne les effets des vêtements sur l'activité métabolique. Par conséquent, l'évaluation des PES qui ne simulent que le poids des vêtements et de l'équipement de protection ne prend pas bien en compte cet effet. La contrainte physiologique associée au port des PCE n'est également pas prise en compte dans les PES actuelles. Typiquement, les tests de sélection en fonction des PES durent moins de 20 minutes alors que l'obligation du port du PCE dans le milieu de travail peut durer jusqu'à une heure avant qu'on utilise les stratégies de refroidissement. Une solution serait de développer un test de stress thermique durant lequel les recrues et les employés réguliers devraient travailler durant une période donnée tout en étant exposés à des conditions ambiantes chaudes et en portant le PCE. [Traduit par la Rédaction] Mots-clés : stress thermique négligé, activité métabolique, capacité aérobie, gabarit, appareil respiratoire autonome, tolérance à la chaleur.

show abstract

Energy cost of stepping in protective clothing ensembles

Cited by 59 publications

References 5 publications

Load carriage, human performance, and employment standards

Load carriage, human performance, and employment standards

Alleviation of Heat Strain by Cooling Different Body Areas during Red Pepper Harvest Work at WBGT 33℃

Protective clothing ensembles and physical employment standards

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About