Armored Medical Research Laboratory Fort Knox, Kentucky Second Partial Report On PROJECT NO. T-5 - TEST OF FLAMEPROOFED CLOTHING Flameproof ed Clothing in Hot Bnvironnents Project No, T-5 21 July 1945 ARMORED MEDICAL RESEARCH LABORATORY Fort Knox, Kentucky Project No0 T~5 SPMEA 727-2 21 July 1945 10 PROJECT: No0 T-5 - Test of Flameproofed Clothingo Second Partial Reporto Subject: Effects of Wearing Flameproofed Clothing in Hot Environments« aD Authority: Letter, 6th Indorsement, SPMDO 421, ASF, SCO, Washington 25, Do Co, 7 December 1944o b0 Purpose; To evaluate the effects of wearing two types of flameproofed clothing in hot environments0 20 DISCUSSION: In the first partial report* on this project, the effects of wearing a type of flameproofed and gasproofed clothing designated therein as MDn were presentedo This garment although especially prepared for use in hot climates was found to impose a greater heat load than the standard herringbone twill outfit0 The increased heat load was not apparent until the men worked in the more severe environments, simulating those that may be found in buttoned-up tanks (D.B0** 120°F., WoBo** 88°Fo) operating in hot climates« Inasmuch as this added heat load can be critical in determining the duration and effectiveness with which combat tank crews continue operation, flameproofed "D" garments could not be considered entirely satisfactory for issue in very hot climates. In continuing the evaluation of flameproofed garments for tank crews, a second small batch of flameproofed and gasproofed clothing, MX,W was subjected to test. The essential components of this impregnating mixture were identical with those used in the "D" impregnation0 It is to be noted that the constituents of the two impregnating agents are the same, with the exception that the "X" garments contained twice as much aluminum stearate in the garment0 The final pickup of impregnite of both was practically equalo 3o CONCLUSIONS: In hot environments (D0Bo 120°Fo, WoB0 8B°F) a0 The heat load imposed by a single layer of either flameproofed "X" twill or herringbone twill is similaro b3 The heat load imposed by flameproofed "D" clothing is definitely greater than that imposed by either the flameproofed "X” or herringbone twill outfits» * Test of Flameproofed Clothing, Project No0 T-5, AMP.L, 17 July 1945 ** DoBo = Dry Bulb Temperature WoB„ ■ Wet Bulb Temperature 1 Co Throughout the test, the physical characteristics of flameproofed "X" clothing closely resembled those of herringbone twill in sharp contrast to the appearance of flameproof ed "Dn garments,. do Neither flameproofed clothing MX”nor MD" produced acute toxic changes of a local or systemic nature in the wearers. Uo RECOMMENDATIONS: a0 That flameproofed "XM clothing be considered unsatisfactory for issue to troops because the flame resistance of flameproofed "X" garments was inferior to that of flameproofed "D" garments, both before and after wearc* b0 That this report be considered in conjunction with the other partial reports from this laboratory0 Submitted by: Ludwig Wo Eichna, Major, McCe Steven M, Horvath, Major, SnC Walter B. Shelley, Captain, M0C Assisted by Howard Golden, Tec 3 John Eo Wagar, Tec 3 Kenneth C. Davis, Tec 3 James P„ Stack, Tec 3 William Jo Robinson, Tec $ James W0 Gregg, P-1 APPROVED -f I M — i ■ i i mm WILLARD MACHLE Colonel, Medical Corps Commanding U Incise #1 - Appendix #2 - Tables I thru V #3 - Charts 1 and 2 - Photograph * NcR.Co Project Q„M«C. Noa 27, Sub-Project 27-A5-X-2, Subj: The Flameproofing of Army Clothing, 30 April 1945o 2 APPENDIX lo Subjects. Experimental Conditions and Procedures This work was conducted as a part of the studies presented in the first partial report0* The subjects, experimental conditions and procedures were identical with those described in the first partial report. However, the present study was carried out in only one environment; viz, D.B. 120oFs, 88°Fo, R.H, 28%0 The men wore the following types and assemblies of clothing which were prepared by Chemical Warfare Service0 aQ Herringbone Twill (HBT). single layer - half wool socks, service shoes, cotton shorts, two piece fatigue uniform of herringbone twillo b0 Flameproofed assembly ftX.M single layer - half wool socks, service shoes, cotton shorts, flameproofed two piece fatigue uniform herringbone twill (Formula X)0 Co Flameproofed assembly nD.n single layer - half wool socks, service shoes, cotton shorts, flameproofed two piece fatigue uniform of herringbone twill (Formula D)0 The flameproofed and gasproofed clothing was of two kinds, "X" and ”D>M They were prepared by impregnation with the same chemicals. However, the "X" formula contained twice as much aluminum stearate as the ”0." Flameproofed MXM clothing consisted of HBT jacket or trousers which had been impregnated with the following formula: chlorinated paraffin/CC-2/zinc oxide/aluminum stearste/acetylene tetrachloride/l39/l39/139/34o8/l390o The pickup amounted to 40%o The garments were not laundered. Flameproofed MDM clothing was impregnated with: chlorinated paraffin/ CC-2/zinc oxide/aluminum stearate/acetylene tetracnloride/139/139/139/l7/l623o The initial pickup was 47% which was considered excessive and was reduced by one laundering to 3&%0 The pickup of impregnite in both batches at the start of the test was, therefore, practically equal. 2o Results In the first partial report of this project, it was shown that no dif- ferences in response to wearing either herringbone twill or flameproofed "Dn clothing could be demonstrated in moderately warm environments; e.g., D.B. 100°Fo, WcB. 80®Fo Differences appeared only in severe environments. Accordingly, to evaluate the relative merits of the two flameproof garments, tests were run at D.B. 120°Fo, MB. 88°F0 which also simulates conditions that may be found in tanks in hot climates. a0 Physiologic Effects of Flameproof ed nXrl Garments and Herringbone Twille A study of the heat loads imposed on men by both flameproofed MXn and herringbone twill outfits was carried out during the period of acclimatization to a hot * Test of Flameproofed Clothing, Proj0 No. T-fj, 1st Partial Report, AMRL, 17 July 45 Inclo §1 1 environment; D=B. 120°FC, W0B. 88°Fe In Chart 1 and Table I are shown the responses of the men clothed in the two types of garments on the first, fifth and eighth day of exposure to the heatQ On the first day, the men were required to walk only one (1) hour; on the fifth day, two hours and on the eighth day, four hours0 Originally the two groups were each composed of 5 menQ On the fifth day, McK and Nau were both ill so that their response may not be representative., Nau is not shown in Chart 1 and Table I on the Bth day since he became ill and was dropped from the problem,, The men in flameproofed "X" garments experienced a heat load similar to that found in the men in herringbone twill0 The average rectal temperature, pulse, sweat loss and skin temperature showed no significant differences. The men, however, felt that the flameproofed "X11 garments were hot and uncomf or table e The data in Table I also illustrate the typical pattern of acclimati- zation,, Apparently the wearing of flameproofed "X” clothing did not alter the course of normal acciimatizationo b0 Physiologic Effects of Flameproofed nDM Garments and Herringbone Twill„ It was shown in the first partial report that at D0B. 120°Fo, W.B. 880Fc the flameproofed "DH garments imposed a greater heat load on men than did herringbone twillo Co Direct Comparison of Physiologic Effects of Flameproofed "X” and Flameproofed MDn Clothing0 On two consecutive days at D0BS >¥0B0 38°Fo, ten acclimatized men (Chart 2, TableII) alternately wore flameproofed "X” and flame- proofed "DH assemblies. The flameproofed WX" garments had been worn 30 hours at 120/88 while the flameproofed MDM twill had been worn U hours previously,, Sig- nificantly higher rectal temperatures were found in the same men when wearing flameproofed nD" clothing,. The men reported that the flameproofed MDM garment was much more uncomfortable to wear stating that it felt hotter than the "X0M It was concluded that on comfort and heat load criteria alone, flameproofed "X" clothing is superior to flameproofed "D" clothing for use in hot climates• 3° Physical Characteristics of the Clothin a„ Gross Characteristics» Type "D" flameproofed twill garments have been described previously., Their stiffness, coarseness and general uncomfortableness were not appreciably altered with wear„ This flameproofed clothing was resistant to wotting and while some improvement was noted, it never attained the wetting qualities exhibited by untreated herringbone twill. Type " X" flameproofed twill garments when received for test were heavy and had a waxy appearance but were not particularly stiff or coarse. After the initial wearing, they became as pliaole as herringbone twillo The greater weight of the "X” garments persisted unchanged throughout the study0 Flameproofed clothing "XM also differed from "D" in that it did not show particular resistance to wetting (Photograph 1)0 In general, it aopeared to Inclo #1 2 be wetted as readily as herringbone twillo Type "X" garments differed somewhat from herringbone twill in that, while it was as completely wetted, it never ab- sorbed the same quantities of moisture,, This was undoubtedly related to the presence of the flame treatment materials which took up some of the space avail- able for absorption,, All subjects preferred type "X*1 flameproofed garments to type "D.w The primary reason was related to the greater ease of wetting type "X11 garments. bo Absorption of Water0 Studies on the sweat uptake during the walking periods were performed. The clothing was dried for at least fourteen (14J hours before being taken into the hot room prior to the day’s workc The individual items of clothing were weighed to within five (5j grams immediately before and after the walking periodo Table III indicates the close similarity between the moisture uptake of untreated herringbone twill and type "XM flameproofed twill* in a previous report, it was shown that type "DM flameproofed twill exhibited relatively poor water uptakes even after considerable wear in comparison to un- treated herringbone twill* This suggested difference between the two kinds of flameproofed garments is borne out by the data presented in Table IV0 The greater ability of type "X" to absorb moisture is not as evident during the initial wear because of the almost three-fold greater period of wear for type "DSM« The superiority of nXH is quite marked by the tenth wearing when these garments have absorbed nearly twice as much moisture despite a smaller amount of available water0 This in- creased water absorbing capacity of "X" clothing was not due to the leaching out of the flameproofing compound for the weight of these flameoroofed garments did not increase with repeated wear (Table V)0 A® Toxic Effects No toxic effects attributable to either ‘type of impregnation were encountered Neither generalized systemic effects nor local cutaneous toxic reactions result- ing from direct contact were seen* Cutaneous lesions attributable to friction of the clothing were encountered and have been discussed in a previous report* 5o Flame Resistance of the Clothin A report on flame-resisting properties of the articles of clothing used in this test has been submitted by another agency** Type "X” clothing was not as resistant as type MD.M As a result of wear in environmental conditions where sweat output is nearly maximal, type "D" lost some of its flameproof qualities while type HXH lost nearly all0 In fact, worn type "X11 flameproofed clothing burned nearly as readily as untreated herringbone twill* This was difficult to understand as there was no change in the weight of the "X" garment which indicated that the impregnite was still present* This failure to retain adequate flameproofness eliminates "X” clothing from consideration for use. * N.R.C. Project Q0 M* C, No* 27, Sub-Project 27-A5-X-2, Subj: The Flameproofing of Army Clothing, 30 April 1945o Inclo #1 ts Q 1 o NAME as x 2 o 3 Kg RECTAL TEMPERATURE °F PULSE RATE/MIN. SKIN TEMP. (Avg. 7/tg0) °F o WEIGHT LOSS Gmykr. 0 1 Hours 2 3 4 0 1 Hours 2 3 4 In it . Final Wei T«(P 164.0 117 201 98.5 101.0 708 o Lin 1.0 99.5 102.4 114 144 96,9 100.0 1223 H 0 Ste 1.0 99.2 103.5 138 168 97,3 100.9 1069 PQ o Nau 0o8 99 oO 102.1* 114 176* — 1058 sc Mic 1.0 99.2 102.5 132 150 99.7 100.5 1046 AYG 99.3 103.1 123 166 98.1 100.6 1021 X» The 1'jO" 553T 103 ,1 90 T7I~ 166.9 —5ST s X Dim 1.0 99.5 - 105 177 98.2 100.6 894 S o Szu loO 99.4 102.5 117 174 98„5 99.1 646 0~t o Kac loO 99.0 102.5 114 177 97o3 100.4 846 McK 1.0 99.4 103 o 7 117 159 98.2 101.4 890 AYG 99n2 103.0 109 172 98nl 100.5 * 828 Wei - 2,0 99ol 102 o 7 103,8 120 135 150 99.0 100.5 952 o Lin 2.0 99,2 101,6 102.1 96 135 135 97.3 97o8 1788 o Ste 2o0 98 <,8 101,6 102.5 126 150 138 97,4 99.7 1289 PQ • Nau lo5 98,6 102.0 102.3* 96 120 168* — — 1124 Mic 2o0 99ol 101.1 101.4 135 153 132 97o5 98.5 1361 5s AYG 99.0 101,8 102.4 115 13? 139 97oB 99.1 1303 Kne 2.6 lOl.'S ” 102.4 90 144 T35~ 97.3 99.1 1300 s Dim 2o0 98,8 102.2 102.5 96 156 144 97.1 98.9 1251 >< Szu 2.0 98.9 101.5 101.8 120 156 147 97*7 99.4 1276 0 CL, Kac 2.0 98.5 100.9 101.5 102 138 132 98.1 98.8 1134 o McK 1.4 98,6 102.1 102.6* 120 174 150* 98.3 100.6* 1130 AYG 98.7 101.6 102.0 106 154 139 97.7 99 o 4 1218 Wei 4.0 98,6 161.TT 102.4 103,3 103,6 108 138 120 144 135 97.7 100.9 916” pi Lin UoO 99o3 101.3 101.8 101,8 102.2 99 123 111 126 114 97,6 98.8 1670 m Ste 4.0 98,3 100.8 101.5 102.2 102,6 96 132 126 123 129 98,1 99.7 1306 X Mic 4c 0 98,8 100.6 101.2 101.4 101.7 114 138 126 129 138 97o3 99.0 1389 AYG 98f8 101.0 101.7 102.2 102.5 104 13? 121 130 129 97.7 99,6 1320 8 Kne 4.0 98.7 101.0 100.7 101.0 101.2 99 114 120 129 120 98,0 98.3 1414 Dim 4.0 98,2 100.6 101.5 101.5 101. u 96 132 129 117 138 97.4 98.5 1199 Szu 4.0 98o4 100.5 100.8 101.2 101.3 108 132 123 120 11? 97,8 98,9 1306 o 0n| Kac 4o0 98.4 100.6 101,2 101.8 102.3 111 141 141 129 150 97o0 100.1 1126 O (Vt McK 4.0 98,5 100.8 102.0 102,6 103,6 in 147 153 138 156 97.4 99.4 1264 AYG 98,4 100.7, _ 101*2 , 101,6 , J.QZJ3 105 133 133 i27 136 97?? 99,0 1262 I ♦Data ta ten a t time of cessation of walking - not used in averages for that hour o 3 The men were required to walk only 1 hour on the 1st day and 2 hours on the 5th day in the heat. TABLE I - THE PHYSIOLOGIC RESPONSES OF .YORKING MEW ./EARING FLAKE PROOFED "X" TWILL AND HERRINGBONE TWILL DURING ACCLIMATIZATION D.Bo 120°F. 9 mr.B. 88°F0 Inclo #2 TABLE I CLOTHING GROUP 25 RECTAL TEMPERATURE °F PULSE RATE/MIN • SKIN TEMP. (Avg.Wtg.) °F WEIGHT LOSS (Sweat) Gm/Kr. 0 1 Hours 2 3 4 0 1 Hours 2 3 4 Init Final Kne 98,5 100.1 100.3 100.1 100.4 99 117 102 120 120 97.0 97.0 1718 Szu 99 oO 100.0 100.3 100.0 100.3 102 135 120 123 135 97.6 98.1 1395 A Dim 98,6 101.1 101.2 100.7 100.3 102 147 126 120 120 97 oO 97.0 1394 X Mar 9Bo2 100.4 101.3 100.2 100.5 114 150 132 132 129 97 o 5 97o9 1571 v JL Kac 99 oO 100.7 100.4 100.2 100.4 114 147 135 144 147 96.9 98.1 1297 . 8 Lin 98,6 100.6 101.0 100.5 100.5 81 114 117 111 114 97.1 96.7 1884 „ ttJ ft Sco. 98.8 101.0 101.0 100.7 100.6 117 141 135 129 123 97.3 96.3 2038 t B Mic 98.9 100.0 100.3 99 <>9 99,8 108 123 120 123 114 97 o4 96,9 1690 3 Low 98,6 101o0 101.7 101.5 101.3 108 135 135 117 129 97o7 98.1 1475 J Pt, Hil 98 03 100.0 100.7 100.6 loo.a 99 117 114 132 117 97.0 98.1 1327 , AVG. 98,6 100.5 100.8 100.4 100.5 104 133 124 125 125 97.2 97.4 1579 I Kne 98.8 100.8 101.5 101.6 101.5 102 123 117 108 117 97.2 99.1 ► 1755 J Szu 98.4 100.6 101.4 101.4 101.4 99 129 135 138 129 97.7 98,7 1482 c A Dim 9 8.4 101.3 101,6 101.3 101.0 81 135 132 129 132 97o2 97.8 1701 ’ o' Mar 98,6 101.2 101.5 101.3 101.0 111 153 153 153 144 97.8 98.0 1752 Kac 98,7 101.1 102.1 101.1 100,8 108 153 144 129 150 96,9 97.9 1527 & Lin 98.8 101.7 102.3 102.4 102.5 96 120 117 126 123 97.7 99.7 2040 g Sco 99 d 101.7 102.2 101.9 102.0 96 135 132 126 135 97.8 98.3 2098 6 B Mic 99 o0 100.9 101.0 101.2 101.4 114 159 138 132 126 97 o 5 98.9 1791 Low 99 oO 101.6 101.5 101.5 102.2 99 141 132 123 129 97.4 99.6 1629 s Hil 98,5 100.7 101.0 100.7 101.2 108 120 120 126 123 97.3 99 oO 1298 AVG, 98c7 101.2 101,6 101.4 101.5 101 137 132 129 131 97.4 98.7 1707 TABLE 71 The Physiologic Responses of Working Men Wearing Flameproof (X) Twill end Flameproof (D) Twill D.B« 120°F9 - W.B. 88°Fo Incl, #2 rm&n TABLE III The Sweat Absorbed by Flameproofed and Herringbone Twill Two-piece Fatigue Uniform* during Work D„B0 120°F - WoBo 88°F (Data are the Average for the Clothing of Five Men) T Y P E OF GARMENT First Wearing Sixth Wearing Herringbone Twill Flameproof Twill "X" Herringbone Twill Flameproof Twill "X" Hours of Wear lo3 lo3 4o0 4o0 Water Absorbed (Grama) Jacket 191 183 408 364 Trouaera 40 52 261 207 Assembly 231 235 669 571 Total Sweat of Subject (Grams) 1359 1096 5156 47S5 Inclo #2 TABLE III TABLE IV The Sweat Absorption by Two Types of Two-piece Flameproofed Herringbone Twill Uniforms as Influenced by Repeated Wear D,BC 120°P - W0Bo B8°F (Data are the Average for the Clothing of Five Wen) TYPE OF G ARHNT Firs t Wearing Tenth Wearing Flameproof Twill "X" Flameproof Twill "D" Flameproof Twill "X" Flameproof Twill "Dn Hours of Wear Water Absorbed (Grams) lo3 3o6 4o2 3o5 Jacket 183 143 543 306 Trousers 52 141 483 305 Assembly 235 284 1026 611 Total Sweat of Subjects (Grams) i ———-— 1096 5722 6710 8181 Inclo #2 TABLE IV TABLE V Weight of Flameproofed Clothing Before and After the Last Wearing (Data are the Average of Five Uniforms of Type r,Xrl and Ten Uniforms of Type MDW) Jacket Trousers Flameproofed Twill "X" Initial Weight (Gm) 960 336 Final Weight (Gm) 948 839 Flamoproofed Twill »’D" Initial Weight (Gm) 1098 960 Final WTelgbt (On) 1106 980 Incl0 #2 TABLE V CHART I AVERAGE PHYSIOLOGIC RESPONSE OF WORKING MEN WEARING FLAMEPROOFED (X) TWILL AND HERRINGBONE TWILL -KEY- FLAMEPROOFED (X) -HERRINGBONE TWILL (H0T) loci. #3 CHART 2 AVERAGE PHYSIOLOGIC RESPONSE OF WORKING MEN WEARING FLAMEPROOFED (X) TWILL AND FLAMEPROOFED (D) TWILL D.B. 120° F- W.B. 88°F -KEY- X FLAMEPROOF (D) TWIL 2ND WEARING -t- FLAMEPROOF (X) TWILI IOTH WEARING Incl. #3 ' FP (X) Arpe