| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
|
|
| 4. |
- Kuklane, Kalev, et al.
(författare)
-
A comparison of two methods of determining thermal properties of footwear
- 1999
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1080-3548 .- 2376-9130. ; 5:4, s. 477-484
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The present European Standard for footwear testing (Standard No. EN 344:1992; European Committee for Standardization [CEN], 1992) classifies footwear thermally by a temperature drop inside the footwear during 30 min at defined conditions. Today, other methods for footwear thermal testing are also available. The aim of this study was to compare EN 344:1992 with a thermal foot method. Six boots were tested according to both methods. Additional tests with modified standard tests were also carried out. The methods ranked the footwear in a similar way. However, the test according to standard EN 344:1992 is a pass-or-fail test, whereas data that is gained from the thermal foot method gives more information and allows further use in research and product development. A change of the present standard method is suggested.
|
|
| 5. |
- Kuklane, Kalev, et al.
(författare)
-
Determination of heat loss from the feet and insulation of the footwear
- 1999
-
Ingår i: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1080-3548 .- 2376-9130. ; 5:4, s. 465-476
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This study compared the methods of determining the footwear insulation on human participants and the thermal foot model. Another purpose was to find the minimal number of measurement points on the human foot that is needed for insulation calculation. Bare foot was tested at 3 ambient temperatures on 6 participants. Three types of footwear were tested on 2 participants. The mean insulation for a bare foot obtained on the participant and model were similar. The insulation of warm footwear measured by the 2 methods was also similar. For thin footwear the insulation values from the participants were higher than those from the thermal model. The differences could be related to undefined physiological factors. Two points on foot can be enough to measure the insulation of footwear on human participants (r =.98). However, due to the big individual differences of humans, and good repeatability and simplicity of the thermal foot method, the latter should be preferred for testing.
|
|
