Abstract
Flightsuit designs incorporating variation on four parameters of interest (one-piece vs two-piece, loose vs close fit, closure system, and seam type) were developed following a functional design process and using CAD procedures (Part I). Prototype garments were produced for each of three phases of instrumented mannequin testing of thermal protection. Fabrics used in the prototypes included a meta-aramid/carbon blend (phases 1 and 3), an FR viscose/meta-aramid blend (phases 2 and 3), and a meta-aramidlpbi blend (phase 3).
Style, fit, and closure system each had small but significant effects on the thermal protection provided by flightsuits. Loose-fitting garments provided better protection than close-fitting ones if the fullness was controlled by appropriate closures. Close-fitting cuff closures on sleeves and pant legs were more effective than were zipper closures. A stand-up collar offered better protection for the neck than a convertible collar. Two-piece flightsuits provided somewhat greater protection than one-piece coveralls, mainly due to the effect of garment layering below the waist. These effects were detected when flightsuits were tested without underwear. The style effect was masked when the garments were worn over long thermal protective underwear, demonstrating the effectiveness of garment layering. Thus, for best assurance of thermal protection, flight personnel should wear long protective underwear under flightsuits at all times; in climates where this underwear might not be suitable, it is recommended that one-and two-piece flightsuits be made in a more loosely-fitting style and incorporate a stand-up collar and adjustable cuffs on sleeves and pant legs.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.