Print this page Email this page
Users Online: 365
Home About us Editorial board Search Browse articles Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2014  |  Volume : 3  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 37

Performance evaluation of two wet bulb globe temperature equipment for heat stress assessment in hot/dry and hot/wet conditions


Department of Occupational Health Engineering, School of Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

Correspondence Address:
Behnam Khodarahmi
Department of Occupational Health Engineering, School of Health, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan
Iran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2277-9183.148282

Rights and Permissions

Aims: The purpose of this study was to compare performance of two these WBGT measuring devices. Materials and Methods: This study was performed in the climatic chamber located in Health School of Isfahan University of Medical Science. The WBGT Casella and the WBGT Model 686 were placed a wide range of hot/dry (28.5-38.5°C) and hot/wet conditions (25.9-37.7°C) in 3 air flow velocity (0.16, 0.27, 0.31 m/s) for 10 h in the climatic chamber. Wet bulb temperature (t nw ), the dry temperature (t a ), the globe temperature (t g ) and the WBGT were measured every 3 min for both instruments in the total period. The data obtained were analyzed by descriptive method, T-paired test and Regression analysis. Results: The result of this study showed that there were statistically significant differences in the meteorological parameter (t nw , t a , t g , WBGT) obtained from the WBGT Casella and WBGT Model 686 (P < 0.001). A high correlation also was seen between the values obtained by the WBGT Casella and the WBGT Model 686 (r = 0.993). Furthermore, there were statistically significant differences in the air flow velocity parameter (0.157 m/s) and (0.27 m/s) and (0.314 m/s) in a hot/dry (r = 0.994) and (0.980) and (0.994) respectively. There were statistically significant differences in the air flow velocity parameter (0.157 m/s) and (0.27 m/s) and (0.314 m/s) in a hot/wet (r = 0.980) and (0.992) and (0.973) respectively. Conclusion: Since there is a high correlation between the values recorded by two devices and a remarkable cost - efficacy of WBGT Model 686 , using WBGT Model 686 is an acceptable method for measuring the heat stress if the prediction equations are utilized. According to the different temperature conditions, was obtained dry temperature, wet temperature and globe temperature both devices measurement in different climatic conditions equation WBGT Casella = 2.04 + 1.03 (WBGT Model 686 ). About 2 units WBGT Model 686 lower than the WBGT Casella and recommend the measures to be considered in this case as well as the manufacturers also, recommend doing that the reform of sensor measurements and the calculation methods.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1758    
    Printed93    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded233    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 1    

Recommend this journal