http://trj.sagepub.com/Textile Research Journal

http://trj.sagepub.com/content/75/3/208The online version of this article can be found at:

 DOI: 10.1177/004051750507500304

2005 75: 208Textile Research JournalJun Li, Yunyi Wang, Weiyuan Zhang and Roger L. Barker

Cold Sensitivity Differences Between Body Sections Under Clothing  

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

can be found at:Textile Research JournalAdditional services and information for    

  http://trj.sagepub.com/cgi/alertsEmail Alerts:

 

http://trj.sagepub.com/subscriptionsSubscriptions:  

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.navReprints:  

http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.navPermissions:  

http://trj.sagepub.com/content/75/3/208.refs.htmlCitations:  

What is This? 

- Mar 1, 2005Version of Record >>

at Northeastern University on November 15, 2014trj.sagepub.comDownloaded from at Northeastern University on November 15, 2014trj.sagepub.comDownloaded from

Cold Sensitivity Differences Between Body Sections Under Clothing

JUN LI1, YUNYI WANG, AND WEIYUAN ZHANG

Fashion Institute, Dong Hua University, Shanghai 200051, People’s Republic of China

ROGER L. BARKER

Center for Research on Textile Protection and Comfort, College of Textiles, North Carolina State UniversityRaleigh, North Carolina 27695, U.S.A.

ABSTRACT

The sensitivity of the human body to the perception of cold varies over sections of thebody. Wear trials conducted for this research show that different locations on the bodyrespond differently to cold stimuli, especially with respect to the degree of local skintemperature decrease, the relationship between the local skin temperature decrease andelapsed time, and subjective cold sensitivity sequences, but some adjacent body sectionshave similar characteristics. The torso of the body is the most sensitive, followed by thethighs, upper limbs, and calves. Body sections closer to the core of the body are moresensitive to cold stimulation than are limbs.

Human comfort is influenced by thermal sensationsarising from the interaction of the skin with the surround-ing environment. People perceive a continuum of coldsensations from indifferent to cool to cold. Human ther-mal sensitivity varies widely at the surface of the body[6]. Many researchers describe the distribution of coldand warm spots in human skin [3, 7, 5, 4, 1, 11], whichare considered to be the reason that different parts of thebody respond differently to cold.

Clothing has a major effect on modulating the rela-tionship between a cooler environment and the perceivedcoolness of the wearer. Therefore, it is necessary todevelop a systematic understanding of sensitivity differ-ences to cold of clothed body sections, especially forclothing designed to protect against cold weather. Forcold protection, thermal insulation values may not beequally effective in different areas of the body. Since theweight of the clothing can be detrimental to extendedwear, cold-protective clothing should be designed tomaximize thermal insulation material for those bodysections that are more sensitive to cold, while leavingother parts of the body less covered to minimize clothingweight and bulk. Thus, cold weather clothing should bedesigned to provide insulation for the most cold-sensitivesections. Strategically distributing thermal insulation onthe body will benefit the wearer.

While other skin sensation studies have focused onhuman physiology, in this study, we simulate real wear-

ing conditions and investigate the combined effects ofclothing and the environment on human physiologicaland psychological responses. We study nine sections ofthe body, including the front of the right thigh (RT), theright calf (RS), the back of the left thigh (BT), the leftforearm (LF), the front of the right upper arm (FF), the leftpart of the lower back (LW), the left part of the upperback (LS), the left part of the abdomen (LA), and the leftpart of the chest (LB).

Methods

Experimental Garments: The experimental garmentswere custom made for each subject participating in thestudy (Table I). Wearing these ensembles, subjects feltcomfortable while their mean skin temperature wasabout 33°C in a man-made climatic chamber (tempera-ture 20.5 � 0.5°C, humidity 50 � 10%).

Experimental garments were tight-fitting (Figure 1).For each body section investigated, the experimentalclothing contained a removable 400 cm2 patch attachedby nylon tabs. These patches could be removed to exposethe wearer’s specific body section to the ambient envi-ronment. Apart from size, the design of the garments andthe other physical properties were identical. The testgarment was worn only in combination with panties.

Subjects: The eight female subjects were healthy, aged21 � 1 years, with an average height of 162.05 � 1.02cm and an average body mass of 50.02 � 0.85 kg. Thesubjects reported to the laboratory at the same time ofday to minimize circadian effects on the body tempera-1 Email: lijun@dhu.edu.cn.

208 TEXTILE RESEARCH JOURNAL

Textile Res. J. 75(3), 208–212 (2005) 0040-5175/$15.00

at Northeastern University on November 15, 2014trj.sagepub.comDownloaded from

ture, and they were all at the early follicular phase oftheir menstrual cycles. The general purpose, procedures,and risks were fully explained, and informed consent wasgiven by all subjects. However, they were not informedof the body exposure sequence to avoid influencing theirsubjective judgments.

Experimental Protocol: All experiments were con-ducted in a climatic chamber at an ambient temperatureof 20.5 � 0.5°C and a relative humidity of 50 � 10%.The subjects rested in the chamber for 50 minutes afterchanging their clothes to experimental garments. Tenminutes after tests were started, one removable patch inthe experimental garment was moved away to expose the

body section underneath it to the ambient environment.In the second trial, organized according to the Thurstonepaired comparisons method [9], two removable patcheswere simultaneously opened, exposing two body sectionsunderneath them, then subjects were required to reportinstantly which unclothed body section was colder. Afterthe 30-minute exposure, the removable patches werereattached for a period of 20 minutes, and the whole testtook 50 minutes (Figure 2). The exposure order of bodysections was random, and the interval time between testswas enough to avoid the effects of previous perceptions.

In our prior investigation for the experimental design,we observed that the exposed body section’s skin tem-perature slowly decreased during the first 20 minutesafter the exposure, and this 20-minute period was themain stage of the temperature decrease after the sectionwas exposed in the trial conditions. Generally, it took 20minutes for the skin temperature of the exposed bodysection to return to the normal level before the nextexposure. At the same time, when the unclothed bodysection was stimulated by the same extent of cold, sub-jects had an obvious subjective coolness sensation.

Measurements: Body temperature and skin tempera-ture were recorded continuously from patch sensors at-tached to the skin surface (accuracy �0.05 °C), and datawere stored at 42-second intervals. The temperature sen-sor was a silicon rubber patch incorporating a PT100 thinfilm temperature detector (conforming to BS 1904 andDIN43760). The exposed body section’s skin tempera-ture was measured at the center of the exposed area, andbody temperature was measured at the left armpit. Toestimate an overall mean skin temperature (MST), skintemperatures were recorded at twelve different positions:face (B), left part of chest (F), left part of upper back (K),left forearm (N), left hand (Q), front of right thigh (T), leftcalf (W), left foot (Y), left part of abdomen (G), back ofleft thigh (V), back of right calf (X), and left part of lowerback (L). MST was calculated by the method of Hardyand Dubois [10]:

TABLE I. Details of fabric and clothing.

Fabric Clothing

Yarn constitution 95% cotton, 5%spandex

length, cm 140 � 1

Weave construction warp-knittedplush loop

breast girth, cm 90 � 0.5

Yarn linear density,tex

27.8 hip girth, cm 95 � 1

Thicknessa, mm 2.46 waist girth, cm 82 � 0.5Density, g � m�2 340 intrinsic thermal

insulation, clo0.98

a Measured using a Frazier Compress meter with a 7.6 cm diameterpresser foot and 7.0 g/cm pressure.

FIGURE 1. Experimental garment.

FIGURE 2. Experiment protocol.

MARCH 2005 209

at Northeastern University on November 15, 2014trj.sagepub.comDownloaded from

MST � �7tB � 35�tF � tG � tK � tL�/4

� 14tN � 5tQ � 19�tT � tV�/ 2

� 13�tW � tX�/ 2 � 7tY�/100 . (1)

Data Analysis and Discussion

Exposing clothed body sections to the ambient envi-ronment changes the local micro-climate under clothingto a large extent, and it changes the aspects of thewearer’s physiological and psychological responses. Un-der the conditions of this study, the exposed section’sskin temperature changed significantly (student’s t test, p� 0.05). For example, Figure 3 shows the continuouschanging of local skin temperature MST while the backof the left thigh (BT) is tested. It becomes clear that the400 cm2 exposure area at the section tested is proper,providing enough intensive cold stimulation to changelocal skin temperature.

On the other hand, for MST and body temperaturethere is no significant difference before body sectionexposure and after (p � 0.05). No significant differenceindicates that the exposed 400 cm2 skin area does notlead to a human thermo-regulation disorder.

MAGNITUDE OF LOCAL SKIN TEMPERATURE DECREASE

We use the multiple comparisons method in statisticsto analyze the magnitude of the exposed body section’slocal skin temperature decrease after exposure [8]. Wetake the difference between the exposed body section’saverage skin temperature in the 5 minute period justbefore exposure and its skin temperature at the end of the

exposure as variable X. Data from nine body sectionsmake nine samples, and each sample has eight observedvalues from eight subjects (Table II).

First we queue samples according to their mean val-ues, considering a sample’s average value as a non-partial estimate of the population’s mean. Then we testthe hypothesis to figure out whether or not a differenceexists for every r sequential mean value (r � 19).

The test statistic Rr is the difference between themaximum and the minimum of r samples’ mean values.The corresponding critical value is

�r ,� � tr,���̂2

n, (2)

where �̂2 is the estimation of population variance, thecoefficient tr,� can be looked up in a given statisticaltable, � is the level of significance, and n is sample size.

If Rr � �r,�, there is no significant difference betweenthe sequential samples’ mean values and they can beclassified into one group. If Rr �r,�, they are differentand cannot be classified into one group.

The calculation shows no significant difference (�� 1%) for three groups in terms of the magnitude of thelocal skin temperature decrease. The first group is the leftforearm (LF) and the front of the right upper arm (FF).The right calf (RS) and the back of the left thigh (BT) arethe second group. The left part of the abdomen (LA) andthe left part of the chest (LB) belong to the third group. Ingeneral, when stimulated by cold, the magnitudes of theexposed body sections’ local skin temperature decreasesare different. The decreasing order is the left part of thebreast (LB) and the left part of the abdomen (LA), the backof the left thigh (BT) and the right calf (RS), the left partof the lower back (LW), the front of the right upper arm(FF) and the left forearm (LF), the left part of the upperback (LS), and the front part of the right thigh (RT).

FIGURE 3. MST and local skin temperature changeswhen BT is exposed.

TABLE II. Data of X (°C).

LB LS LF RT LA FF BT RS LW

x1 2.59 1.45 1.69 1.22 2.79 1.83 2.50 2.33 2.10x2 2.60 1.36 1.64 1.08 2.78 1.71 2.43 2.50 2.00x3 2.81 1.41 1.66 1.25 2.74 1.80 2.41 2.36 1.97x4 2.81 1.50 1.60 1.18 2.65 1.76 2.36 2.45 1.80x5 2.58 1.40 1.73 1.09 2.69 1.65 2.37 2.40 2.18x6 2.70 1.43 1.60 1.21 2.59 1.74 2.54 2.27 2.15x7 2.58 1.38 1.76 1.19 2.63 1.63 2.30 2.45 2.15x8 2.90 1.60 1.68 1.27 2.67 1.80 2.37 2.25 2.05x� 2.696 1.441 1.670 1.186 2.693 1.740 2.410 2.376 2.050

210 TEXTILE RESEARCH JOURNAL

at Northeastern University on November 15, 2014trj.sagepub.comDownloaded from

CONTINUOUS CHANGING OF LOCAL SKIN TEMPERATURE

As for the other physiological response, we studied therelationship between the exposed body sections’ skintemperature’s continuous decrease (Table III) and theelapsed time during the exposure period with the Smir-nov test [2].

The Smirnov test is a nonparametric statistical methodto test whether the distribution is the same among inde-pendent samples. Data from nine body sections (randomsamples k � 1–9) of eight subjects (n � 8) have anunknown distribution F1(X), F2(X), . . . , F9(X). SupposeH0: F1(X) � F2(X) � . . . , � F9(X) (probability distri-butions are identical) or H1: Fi(X) � Fj(X) � . . . ,�F9(X) (probability distributions are not identical). Fork samples, we define their maximum values individuallyas z1 , z2 , . . . , zk to satisfy z1 , � z2 , . . . , �zk. Theexperience distribution of the sample with zk is defined asS(k)(X), while the experience distribution of the samplewith z1 is S(l)(X). The test statistic T is the maximumvertical distance between S(l)(X) and S(k)(X), which inmathematics can be written as

T � Supx

�s�l ��X� � s�k��X� , (3)

where the critical value wl�� (� is the level of signifi-cance) can be looked up in a given statistical table. If T

� wl��, then K samples show a difference; if T � wl��,no difference exists between them.

The Smirnov test reveals a statistically significant dif-ference for the nine body sections’ skin temperatures’continuous changing processes when being stimulated bycold (� � 5%). Within nine body sections are threegroups in which each body section has the identicalrelationship between the local skin temperature’s de-crease and the elapsed time. The three groups are the leftpart of the upper back (LS), the left forearm (LF), and thefront of the right upper arm (FF); the back of the left thigh(BT) and the right calf (RS); and the left part of theabdomen (LA) and the left part of chest (LB).

COLD SENSITIVE SEQUENCE

We investigated the body sections’ sensitivity se-quence to cold when exposed to the ambient environ-ment with the Thurstone paired comparisons method.Exposing two body sections (j,k) simultaneously madeone pair of stimuli R(j), R(k), and caused two sensationsS(j), S(k) in the wearer. S(j) conforms to a normal dis-tribution whose mean is SD(j) and the variance is j; S(k)conforms to the normal distribution whose mean is SD(k)and the variance is k. The probability that body sectionj is cooler than k (S(k) S(j)) or not (S(k) � S(j)) can bederived from the distribution of S(j) � S(k).

The paired body sections were stimulated by the sameintense cold, and the paired comparisons data are re-corded in Table IV. The number of subjects who judgedbody section j to be cooler than k is put in the positionsomewhat above the table diagonal. On the other hand,under the diagonal is the number of subjects who judgedk to be cooler than j.

In terms of the value of SD(j) (Table V), the sensitivitysequence of body sections to cold stimuli is (from themost sensitive to the most insensitive) the left part of thelower back (LW), the left part of the upper back (LS), the

TABLE III. Exposed body section’s skin temperature decrease (°C).

Time(�42s) RT RS BT LF FF LW LS LA LB

1 0.07 0.10 0.58 0.16 0.27 0.51 0.25 0.52 0.582 0.11 0.40 0.81 0.34 0.43 0.72 0.37 0.80 1.133 0.23 0.63 0.99 0.54 0.51 0.83 0.46 1.03 1.434 0.31 0.85 1.13 0.71 0.61 0.99 0.54 1.20 1.605 0.41 1.02 1.25 0.87 0.67 1.15 0.64 1.37 1.736 0.45 1.14 1.33 0.96 0.84 1.27 0.72 1.50 1.887 0.50 1.23 1.46 1.06 0.93 1.41 0.78 1.63 1.978 0.66 1.40 1.67 1.15 1.06 1.47 0.84 1.70 2.059 0.73 1.48 1.76 1.21 1.11 1.50 0.90 1.89 2.14

10 0.83 1.54 1.84 1.25 1.18 1.55 0.96 1.93 2.2011 0.87 1.63 1.90 1.29 1.28 1.58 1.01 2.05 2.2812 0.93 1.70 1.94 1.31 1.32 1.63 1.04 2.13 2.3713 0.97 1.73 1.99 1.34 1.35 1.65 1.05 2.25 2.4014 1.03 1.81 2.06 1.38 1.38 1.67 1.06 2.30 2.4815 1.06 1.90 2.10 1.44 1.40 1.70 1.14 2.34 2.5016 1.08 1.94 2.14 1.46 1.45 1.73 1.17 2.40 2.5117 1.12 2.00 2.19 1.48 1.48 1.79 1.22 2.43 2.5218 1.15 2.09 2.22 1.51 1.52 1.81 1.24 2.45 2.5519 1.16 2.14 2.26 1.54 1.56 1.85 1.28 2.49 2.5820 1.18 2.20 2.28 1.56 1.60 1.88 1.32 2.53 2.6021 1.18 2.23 2.30 1.57 1.65 1.92 1.36 2.56 2.6422 1.18 2.29 2.34 1.60 1.68 1.95 1.42 2.59 2.6623 1.19 2.32 2.37 1.62 1.71 1.99 1.44 2.62 2.6724 1.19 2.33 2.40 1.63 1.74 2.02 1.46 2.67 2.7025 1.20 2.36 2.41 1.66 1.75 2.05 1.48 2.69 2.72

TABLE IV. Paired comparisons data.

j

k

LB LS LF FT LA FF BT RS LW

LB 4 1 4 7 3 7 2 7 2LS 7 4 5 5 6 5 6 7 3LF 4 3 4 3 3 4 2 5 1FT 1 3 5 4 4 3 6 7 1LA 5 2 5 4 4 7 6 7 5FF 1 3 4 5 1 4 2 6 2BT 6 2 6 2 2 6 4 3 2RS 1 1 3 1 1 2 5 4 3LW 6 5 7 7 3 6 6 5 4

MARCH 2005 211

at Northeastern University on November 15, 2014trj.sagepub.comDownloaded from

left part of the abdomen (LA), the left part of the chest(LB), the front of the right thigh (RT), the back of the leftthigh (BT), the left forearm (LF), the front of the rightupper arm (FF), and the right calf (RS).

In Table V, SD�( j ) is calculated by adding 0.6211 toSD(j) to make Min(SD(j)) � 0 which conforms to thestandard normal distribution N(0,1). Based on SD�( j ), welooked up P(j) in the given statistical table. In this studyP(j) is a numeric of psychological sensation. Accordingto Weber’s law [12], 5% is considered as its classifyingvalue. If the two values’ difference is less than 5%, theyshould be classified as a group with identical sensitivityto cold stimulus. So the left part of the lower back (LW),the left part of upper back (LS), and the left part of theabdomen (LA) are in one group, the front of the rightthigh (RT) and the back of the left thigh (BT) are inanother group, and the left forearm (LF) and the front ofthe right upper arm (FF) belong to the third group.

Conclusions

In this study, we investigate responses from the frontside of the right thigh (RT), the right calf (RS), the back ofthe left thigh (BT), the left forearm (LF), the front of theright upper arm (FF), the left part of the lower back (LW),the left part of the upper back (LS), the left part of theabdomen (LA), and the left part of chest (LB) whenstimulated by cold.

The cold sensitivity of the human body under clothingshows a spatial distribution that varies over these bodysections. Significant changes due to the exposure ofclothed body sections to cold include two aspects: localskin temperature changing patterns and psychologicalsensitivity differences of body sections. For the bodysections investigated in this study, their magnitudes ofdecrease in local skin temperature, the relationship be-tween local skin temperature change and elapsed time,and the sensory response to cold are different. However,body sections with codes that share the same underliningin the following section are similar in correspondingcharacteristic and should be classified as the same type:

LB, LA, BT, RS, LW, FF, LF, LS, RT are the decreasingorder of the magnitudes of local skin temperature de-creases.

RT, BT, RS, LW, FF, LF, LS, LB, LA describe the charac-teristic of the local skin temperature is continuouslychanging process.

LW, LS, LA, LB, RT, BT, LF, FF, RS are the cold sensitivitysequence (from relatively sensitive to insensitive).

This grouping indicates that body sections belongingto the same type are always adjacent. The torso is themost sensitive to cold, and the next sections are thighs,upper limbs, and calves. Body sections close to the coreare more sensitive to cold stimulation than limbs.

Literature Cited

1. Carterette, E.C., and Friedman, M.P., “Handbook of thePerception Vol.6-B,” Academic Press, NY, 1978.

2. Conover, W.J., “Practical Nonparametric Statistics,” JohnWiley & Sons, NY, 1998.

3. Duarand, J., and Raynaus, J., “Thermal Comfort,” Inserm,Paris, 1979.

4. Hensel, H., “Thermal Sensations and Thermoreceptors inMan,” Charles C. Thomas, Springfield, IL, 1982.

5. Hensel, H., “Thermoreceptor and Temperature Regula-tion,” Academic Press, London, 1981.

6. Hyun, S.O., Skin Sensations Perceived in Apparel Wearunder Varying Conditions, Doctoral dissertation, Univer-sity of Maryland, College Park, 1989.

7. Iggo, A., “Handbook of Sensory Physiology (Somatosen-sory System),” Springer-Verlag, NY, 1973.

8. Pan, W., “Statistic Methods,” Shanghai Education Press,Shanghai, China, 1980.

9. Sanhei, H., “Clothing Science,” Nizawa Press, Osaka, Ja-pan, 1979,

10. Tamura, T., “Fundamental Clothing Physiology,” BunkaPress, Tokyo, Japan, 1985.

11. Weber, E.H., “The Sense of Touch,” Academic Press,London, 1978.

12. Wu, H., “Experiment Design and Pluralism Analysis,”Textbook of China Textile University, Shanghai, China,1995.

Manuscript received June 9, 2003; accepted November 14, 2003.

TABLE V. Thurstone paired comparisons—calculation results.

LB LS LF FT LA FF BT RS LW

SD(j) 0.071 0.476 �0.273 �0.089 0.362 �0.330 �0.110 �0.621 0.514SD�( j ) 0.692 1.097 0.348 0.532 0.983 0.291 0.511 0 1.136P(j) 75.50% 86.40% 63.70% 70.19% 83.65% 61.41% 69.50% 50% 87.29%

212 TEXTILE RESEARCH JOURNAL

at Northeastern University on November 15, 2014trj.sagepub.comDownloaded from