COMPLEX PERFORMANCE
EVALUATION OF
PERSONAL PROTECTION
ENSEMBLE
Pavel Castulik
CB 050 Vojenská chemie, toxikologie ochrana před vysoce toxickými
látkami
Přírodovědecká fakulta Masarykovi university Brno
Jaro 2011
The Royal
Wedding
June 19, 2010
Personnel Safety
 Hazard Assessment
 Detection/warning means
 Protective Gear performance
 Personal decontamination means
 Communications
 Accountability during the response
 Training and education
 Human Factors & Fitness & Wellness
 Best Safety Practices
Levels of PPE Protection
Level A
Level C
Level B
Level D
Personal Protective Technology Priorities
 Spectrum of hazards
 Respiratory protection
 Integration
 Mission deployment
 Chemical & Biological
 Radiological
 Ambient temperature & Workload
 Improve respiratory protection
 Component integration and
compatibility
 Improving gloves, footwear, hood,
visibility and communication
 Ease donning and doffing (limited
assistance)
 Improve mission operation and
mobility
 Ease of maintenance
Personal Protective Technology Priorities
 Reduce
physical/heat
stress
 Improve comfort
 Improve garment breathability
 Improve heat and moisture dissipation
 Improve cooling systems
 Improve hydration systems
 Reduce equipment weight
 Real-time personal physiological status
monitoring
 Anti-heat stress and wellness training
program
 Enhance ergonomic characteristics
 Improve underwear
 Ensure consistent and appropriate sizing
of components
 Improve quick-done-replacement of
protective gloves and overboots
Personal Protective Technology Priorities
 Testing and
evaluation
 Reliable and objective
equipment performance
assessment
 Implement testing
technology for complexity
and integrity of protective
ensemble
 Implement outcomes for
improvement of protective
equipment design and
utilization
Configuration Control
 Component Integration and Compatibility
 Eliminates bodily exposure at component
interfaces
 Functional and safe interconnectivity of
masks, hoods, gloves, boots/overboots
with protective gear
 The standardized specification
dimensions and interfaces of protective
ensembles components
Testing System in Systems
PP ENSEMBLE MISSION
PERFORMANCE
 Suit
 Hood
 Mask
 SCBA
 Underwear
 Gloves
 Boots/Overboots
 Cooling
 Communication
 Protection Factor
 Mission operability &
effectiveness
 Comfort and
 Friendly use
Rationales for
Evaluating Protective Ensemble
 When a protective suit is constructed from a suitable
material (swatch test passed), however, the final product
can no longer be considered homogeneous and
continuous
 The suit is fabricated from many panels that are
stitched, bonded, or otherwise held together, which
creates discontinuities
 In addition, the suit must be integrated with other
protective gear, such as a hood, a mask, gloves, and
boots, which create additional discontinuities in the
overall ensemble
TRINITY TESTS
Swatch
Test
Physiology
Test
PPE
Test
Testing and Evaluation of PPE
Tier 4
SYSTEMS TESTING
Tier 3
Physiology Testing
Tier 2
Component Testing
[Masks, gloves, boots,
Filters, etc.]
Tier 1
Materials Testing
[Swatch materials
Barrier/Filtration]
Part I
SWATCH TESTING FOR PPE
Swatch Testing with Permeation Cell
Swatch Permeation of HD
Diffusion Flow of HD through PE Foil 0.035 mm @ 30°C
F [g/cm2/s]
0,00E+00
1,00E-09
2,00E-09
3,00E-09
4,00E-09
5,00E-09
6,00E-09
7,00E-09
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Time [min]
FHD
Permeation of HD through PE Foil 0.035 mm @ 30°C
QHD [g/cm2]
0,00E+00
1,00E-05
2,00E-05
3,00E-05
4,00E-05
5,00E-05
6,00E-05
7,00E-05
8,00E-05
9,00E-05
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Time [min]
QHD
BTT
Degradation of Rubber Protective Fabric
with High Concentration of Chlorine
Technology Failure
Particle Charcoal Fallen Apart from
Carrier Fabric
Technology Failure
Particle Charcoal Fallen Apart from
Carrier Fabric
Carrier Fabric
„Free“ of Particle Charcoal
Loose Particle Charcoal
Collected at the Edge of
PPE Jacket
PPE Performance Evaluation
CURRENT STATUS IMPROVEMENT
 Design material and
components for PPE are
meeting/exceeding standards
 Evaluation/testing is primarily
focused on swatches and
components, thus….
 Current garment certification
testing focuses primarily on
the material properties of the
individual components
 Implementation of fullbody
testing of protective
ensemble in dynamic
conditions as a part of a
new rigorous certification
 An example: New method
„V-MIST“
Visual-Man-In-Simulant-Test
and
Workload Climate Tests
Part II
VISUAL-MAN-IN-SIMULANT TEST
FOR INTEGRITY EVALUATION OF
PPE
CW
CW
CW
CW
CW
CW
CW
CW
CW
CW
CW
CW
CW
CW
Exposure
Routes
Permeation
Convection
Penetration
„Bellows“ Effect of Under-suit Exposure
Mannequin „Golem“ in PPE and V-MIST
detection of Chlorine penetration
Chimney`s/Pocket`s
Effect
„Chimney“ Effect of Legs Exposure
when Trousers are Worn over Boots
Front side
Back side
Improper Donning of PPE
Integrated Seals of
Hood & Arms & Legs
Improvised Sealing of PPE
•Mask with Hood
•Closures/Zippers
•Gloves with Sleeve
•Boots with Trouser
PS
PS
C
C
PF 0

Protective Suit Protective
Mask
PMC
C
PFPM
0

PSPM
PSPM
PM
PFPF
PP
C
C
C
C
PFCOMPL 


0
00
.
Complete Ensemble
Protection Factor of PP Ensemble
Shortfalls of PPE Design,
Manufacturing and Exploitation
Holes&Cracks
Valve Malfunction
Seams
Diffusion
Penetration
Diffusion
Flow
PPE Protection
Material
Rationales for
Evaluating Protective Ensemble
 In addition, CB protective suits may also be
subject to wear and damage during service,
potentially under extreme operation conditions
 Perforations, punctures, and tears in the suit
material will create further discontinuities,
including malfunction of closures (zipper) and/or
outlet valves
 For the reasons outlined above, evaluating the
performance of a CB protective ensemble under
realistic, dynamic conditions is far more
complex than only relying on evaluating of
construction and component materials
Rationales for
Evaluating Protective Ensemble
 PPE system is required to function under
dynamic conditions and physical motion of
individuals
 These conditions are affecting protective
properties of PPEs resulting in
 „Bellows“
 „Chimney“ and
 „Windshield “ effects
Testing PPE with Volunteer
Individuals in Gas Test Chamber
Testing PPE with Semi-robotic
Mannequin in Gas Test Chamber
Test Mannequin
„GOLEM“
Illustration of Golem's motion
Human Body Motion Simulation
 Walking with the arms motion (up to 5 km/h)
 Stretch arms upwards
 Forward bend
 Knee-bend
 Sitting
 Head turning (synchronised with arms
movement optional)
 Breathing
 Chemical Vapour and Aerosol System-Level
testing of chemical/biological protective suits.
 The test individuals/mannequin are outfitted
with passive sampling detectors (PAD) on
their skin, that absorb the chemical
compound when and if it penetrates the
protective suit system.
 The sensing PADs are positioned at various
places on the body and are analyzed at the
conclusion of the test procedure.
Man-In-Simulant Test
„MIST“
Placement of Passive Adsorption
Devices of the MIST
 19 pcs PAD (size cca
1,5x1,5 cm = 2,25
sq.cm) represents 43
sq.cm
 Human Body Surface =
19,000 sq.cm
 19 PADs represents
only 0,22 % of a
body total surface
What about remaining
99,78 %
of body surface ?
 This is the task what V-MIST can do
Visual
Man-In Simulant-Test
is enable
precisely and
objectively identified
penetration of challenge
agents/simulant
through deficiencies of
personal protective
ensembles
Why V-MIST ?
 Data usually obtained by means of discrete samplers do
not distinguish precisely the place/areas of
breakthrough (permeation/penetration), spreading under
protective suit and moreover, the proper detection and
subsequent evaluation of such data is very time
consuming
 Even if the results of MIST are undoubtedly correct in
quantity, the user, in fact, would not know whether
he/she donned the suit correctly and whether all parts of
the equipment are sufficiently leak-tight and functioning
properly
 V-MIST technique allows to evaluate
 whole body surface,
 calculate Dermal Dose exposure and
 the Protection Factor of a PPE
Options Color Detection with different
Agents
Benzoylchloride Sulphur MustardChlorine
Sarin (GB) detection with
fluorophore oxime sensible to UV light
Mannequin
System
PPE Assembly
1st Level
Protective Cape
2nd Level
Chemical
Protective Suit
3rd Level
Chemical Sensing
Underwear
Test gas:
Chlorine
Benzoylchloride
S-Mustard
Time of test: 30min
Dynamic
movements:
Breathing
Walking
Knee-bending
Etc.
Test of PPE Gas-tightness in GTCh
Example of Test outcome Data
6,970
65,35
1
1





n
c
n
dk
D
SCt
PF
2
5
1
64,19230 cmSd 
gDc 5,190
5
1

Body Surface
Total Dose
Protection Factor
Exposure 30 min of exercise
Correlated
Doses for
HD 432 g/cloth
241 g/cap
191 g/shirt
0 g/trousers
GB 381 g/cloth
212 g/cap
168 g/shirt
0 g/trousers
How it works
Test Protocol Information
Type of PPE: FOP
Date: 06.04.09
Figurant: # 1
Part of PPE: Jacket
Side of Item: Front
Challenge Conc.
[ppm]:
2,8
Time of Expo. [min]: 30
Area of Item [cm2]: 4887,3
Doses [g]: 643,21
Pseudo-color Scale Concentration
1,39
1,8
1,03
0,6
0,34
Chlorine
[g/cm2]
Image of Whole Body Exposure
WHOLE
BODY
S=18322 cm2
D= 1022 µg
Part III
IMPROVEMENT OF
PPE PROTECTION FACTOR
THROUGH ARTIFICIAL
VENTILATION
AGAINST „WINSHIELD EFFECT“
„Wind Shield“ Penetration Effect
Sub-millimeter
hole (0.9mm)
Penetration „signature“
through the hole
Penetration through
zipper closure
Real and Pseudo-color Images
Front side Front side
Back side
Front side
Aerodynamic Flow-Windshield
Barry J. at all: Computational Fluid
Dynamics Modeling of Fabric Systems for
Intelligent Garment Design. MRS Bulletin,
August 2003
Back side
Decreased Exposure
D1.10-2 cm2/s
h=0,02 cm
FAMB= D x C x A x Δ t / h FINT=  x C x A x Δ t
FINT  FAMB
  D/h
  0,01/0,02  0,5 [cm/s]
  D/h + p
w 
Outflow Air
Penetration Flow versus Front Wind
Penetratonrate dependence onwindvelocity
0
0,2
0,4
0,6
0,8
1
1,2
1,4
1,6
1,8
0 0,5 1 1,5 2 2,5 3
Wind velocity [m.s-1
]
Penetrationrate[cm.s-1
]
Experiment
Theory
p = 0,1 . 3
w
 where p is
penetration flow (cm/s)
and
 w is wind velocity
(m/s)
 p = 0,72 (0,8)
@ w 2 m/s
  D/h + p
  0,5 + 0,8  1,3 [cm/s]
p = 0,8 cm/s
@
w= 2,0 m/s
FINT =  x C x A x Δt
Outflow Air
Ventilation-leakage
Blower hose with airflow 100 l/min
Soupy bubbles
indicating outflow
of ventilated air from
protective ensemble
Outflow Air
Part IV
THERMOVISION SURVEY
OF HUMAN BODY THERMAL BEHAVIOR
IN PPE
Physiology evaluation in Climate
Test Chamber
Response of human body to workload
in PPE
 The goal is to calculate permissible time of a
person's deployment in a PPE under particular
environmental conditions and workload
scenario
 Key controlled parameters are ambient
temperature, humidity, heat radiation, workload
(watts), time exposure, the core body
temperature (in rectum), heart frequency and
loss of body fluids (perspiration, urine),
psychomotoric response
Heat Workload and
Ventilation/Cooling Evaluation
Body Heat Stress Response
Trectal= f (t) for continuous workload
Trectal= f (t) for periodical workload
(work and rest)
Trectal= f (t) for continuous workload
with ventilation
Trectal= f (t) for periodical workload
with ventilation
Thermo-imaging of Heat/Cooling
Dissipation
Cooling Evaporation Effect
Conclusions
 Swatch testing represents only precondition for
requested properties of PPEs during their design,
development and manufacturing
 Visual-MIST represents high fidelity and fast testing
technology for comprehensive evaluation of protective
ensemble in dynamic condition
 Utilization of V-MIST as standard test technology for
determination of PPE`s Protection Factor would require
also revisions and the improvement of protection
standards
 Heat stress properties of a PPE and workload response
of a PPE users have to become the standard
 Collaboration is welcome
Jiri Slabotinsky, Stanislav Bradka,
Lukas Kralik, Petr Smitka, Marketa Weisheitelova
National Institute for Nuclear, Biological and Chemical Protection v.v.i.,
Kamenna 79, 262 31 Milin, Czech Republic, www.sujchbo.cz
Petr Navratil*,
*VOP 026 Sternberk s.p.-Military Technical Institute of Protection,
Veslarska 230, 637 00 Brno, Czech Republic www.vtuo.cz
Pavel Castulik**
**CBRNe Consultant, Mikulaskovo sq. 17, 625 00 Brno,
Czech Republic
E-mail: pcastulik@yahoo.co.uk
CV Dr. Pavel Castulik
• Education: University of Defence, Chemical Engineering
and NBC Defence, Dipl. Eng., PhD
• Commander of NBC Battalion
 PhD Thesis on Decontamination
 Head of Research & Development Decontamination
Department
 Head of R&D Chemical and Nuclear Protection Division
 Destruction of CWs in Iraq
 Development of the Technical Secretariat of the
Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons
 Head of Training at the OPCW
 Head of Chemical Weapons Demilitarization at the OPCW
 Chief Inspector at the OPCW
 University lecturer
 Consultant on CBRNe