Next Article in Journal
Generation of Primary Microplastics from Textile Industry Departments: An Overview
Previous Article in Journal
Laser-Protective Kevlar with Acrylic-Based Expandable Graphite Coating
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Textiles
Volume 6
Issue 2
10.3390/textiles6020059
textiles-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Towards Standardised Evaluation of Cooling Garments: Validation of a Novel Test Protocol

by
Miriam Martínez-Albert
1,2,*,
Raquel Belda-Anaya
2,
David Mínguez-García
2 and
Eva Bou-Belda
2
1
Comfort Department, Textile Industry Research Association (AITEX), Carretera de Bañeres, No 10, 03802 Alcoy, Alicante, Spain
2
Department of Textile and Paper Engineering, Higher Polytechnic School of Alcoy, Universitat Politècnica de València, PI. Ferrándiz Carbonell, s/n, 03801 Alcoy, Alicante, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Textiles 2026, 6(2), 59; https://doi.org/10.3390/textiles6020059
Submission received: 16 January 2026 / Revised: 2 May 2026 / Accepted: 7 May 2026 / Published: 11 May 2026
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Personal cooling garments are designed to help individuals manage excess heat in high-temperature environments. The thermal effects of these garments are typically evaluated through thermal manikin experiments or human subject tests. However, there remains an insufficient understanding of the correlation between the cooling efficacy of garments tested with thermal manikins and the thermal responses observed in the human body. This study seeks to establish thermal correspondence by integrating a novel thermal manikin-based testing protocol with physiological simulation software and controlled human-subject trials. A phase change material (PCM) cooling vest serves as a representative textile system for comparison. The results indicate that the manikin-based protocol effectively replicates the non-linear skin temperature drop and thermal stabilisation phases evident in humans, demonstrating a maximum deviation of only 0.2 °C in skin temperature (Tsk) across varying metabolic loads. These findings provide specific experimental evidence on the minimal deviation between the manikin’s skin temperature and human trials, demonstrating that the established novel testing protocol is capable of accurately detecting the heat-flux saturation points and latent heat discharge of the textile system. The proposed approach endorses this protocol as a robust, reproducible methodology for assessing thermal comfort and serves as a starting point for future international standardised protocols in personal cooling textiles, especially where human safety cannot be guaranteed.

Graphical Abstract

1. Introduction

There are four methods through which the body loses heat to the environment: conduction, convection, radiation, and evaporation [1]. Heat stress is influenced by thermal radiation, air temperature, relative humidity, metabolic heat production, air movement around the body surface, and clothing [2]. During physical work, increased intensity can elevate the risk of heat stress and dehydration by raising individuals’ internal body temperature. To maintain a normal internal body temperature of 37.0 °C, the skin temperature must be between 32.0 °C and 34.0 °C [3]. This range allows for an effective temperature gradient from the body to the skin and then from the skin to the surrounding environment. When the ambient temperature exceeds 33.0 °C, the body’s ability to evaporate sweat becomes insufficient, leading to an increase in both core and skin temperatures, as well as increased blood flow and heart rate [4]. This rise in body temperature can negatively affect cognitive function, particularly during complex tasks or activities [5].
Clothing plays a vital role in maintaining the body’s thermal equilibrium by acting as a barrier against external radiant heat and cold environments. In conditions where the ambient air temperature exceeds body temperature, it is necessary to minimise heat conduction from the environment to the body and to allow sweat to evaporate from the skin to the environment through the garment. In this case, it is essential to use textiles with low thermal conductivity and good breathability, which help the human body regulate its temperature. Some workers are required to wear Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) during their tasks. While PPE protects workers from specific hazards, it can become a disadvantage when they must work outdoors for extended periods in hot environments. However, when a textile must meet standards for personal protective equipment (PPE) certification, it may occasionally compromise breathability and moisture management. This is especially true when certifying, for example, cold-protective garments under the EN 342-17 standard [6]. To fulfil the cold-protection insulation requirements outlined in this standard, materials must provide adequate insulation. However, it is important to note that increasing insulation levels typically reduces breathability. In such cases, cooling garments can help workers maintain thermal comfort while wearing PPE [7] without compromising the protection. When selecting a personal cooling system, it is essential to consider several factors, including the intended use, ergonomic design, weight, and compatibility with any personal protective equipment (PPE) being worn simultaneously.

1.1. Personal Cooling Systems

Over the past twenty years, the number of publications in the field of cooling vests has increased significantly [8]. They are divided into passive (phase change cooling garment, evaporative cooling garment), active (air cooling garment, liquid cooling garment) and hybrid systems (with two or more cooling systems) [9]. The choice of cooling mechanism depends on the user’s activity type, the duration of the activity, and the compatibility with other garments.
The most common types of cooling mechanisms and their principal characteristics are [10]:
-
Phase Change Material (PCM) cooling mechanism: This technology employs microcapsules that change from solid to liquid to reduce body temperature. Their performance and cooling duration depend on the microcapsule’s melting point. It must be considered that, to produce the cooling effect, they must be in a solid state before use.
-
Air-ventilation mechanisms: This type of cooling garment uses air convection from fans to facilitate the evaporation of sweat from the user’s skin. The principal advantage is that it is suitable for any level of activity, from light to heavy. The principal disadvantage is that its cooling duration depends on the battery’s capacity.
-
Evaporative cooling mechanisms: This cooling garment uses evaporation to reduce the user’s body heat. The disadvantage of this cooling technique is that the garments must be wet to produce the cooling effect.
-
Cool liquid circulation mechanisms: These mechanisms use the circulation of cool water around the user’s body to produce cooling. To cool the water, the garment needs a chiller and a special water reservoir, so the principal disadvantage is its weight, which compromises ergonomics.
-
Hybrid cooling mechanisms: These garments integrate multiple cooling techniques into a single garment.
For this research, a PCM vest has been used because it is the most widely used and researched cooling garment for heat dissipation, thanks to its notable features. These include simple design and versatile options that accommodate various PCM melting points, as well as their short-term cooling effectiveness, reusability, and independence from electrical power sources. Several factors influence the effectiveness of PCM cooling vests: the melting point of the microcapsules, the dosage used, the area covered, the PCM mass, and the PCM’s latent heat [11]. The cooling effect of these vests relies on microencapsulation technology, which absorbs heat from both the human body and the surrounding environment. This process occurs as the PCM transitions from a solid to a liquid state through conduction and convection [12]. This phase change creates a temperature-regulating effect because of the material’s low thermal conductivity. The cooling performance of the PCM cooling garment depends on the temperature at which the PCM undergoes a phase transition from solid to liquid. The lower the transition temperature, the more efficient the cooling vest; however, excessively low transition temperatures may cause an uncomfortable cold sensation and water condensation on the garment or skin [13]. These biologically derived cooling materials, such as fatty acids (e.g., capric or lauric acid) [14], bio-paraffins (e.g., bio-based n-octadecane or n-hexadecane) [15], and bio-hydrogel matrices (e.g., chitosan or sodium alginate) [16], are effective for cooling textiles. This effectiveness is due to their appropriate and stable phase transition temperatures, high latent heat storage capacities (typically exceeding 180 J/g), and low thermal conductivities [17]. These materials can be integrated into cooling garments by incorporating them into fibres or fabrics through packaging, encapsulation, and infiltration [18]. Compared with active cooling technologies, such as air ventilation or liquid circulation systems, cooling garments based on PCMs offer a simpler structural design, an autonomous solution, reduced weight, and improved wearability, though their cooling duration is inherently limited by the material’s phase change process. In contrast to evaporative cooling mechanisms, whose performance is limited by ambient relative humidity, PCM systems provide more stable, predictable cooling performance across varying environmental conditions, particularly in high-humidity environments. Therefore, biologically based PCMs represent a technically viable option within the broader range of personal cooling technologies because of their isothermal phase transition and low thermal conductivity.

1.2. Test Methods for the Evaluation of the Cooling Garments

There are two testing methods to assess the cooling properties of personal cooling systems (PCSs). The standard ASTM F2371-24 [19] outlines a method for measuring the heat removal rate of PCSs using a sweating heated manikin. This approach enables evaluation of both the heat-removal rate and the cooling duration provided by the cooling garment. Similarly, ASTM F2300-22 [20] measures the performance of PCSs through physiological testing on human subjects. When comparing the standard test method that uses thermal manikins to the test conducted with human subjects, the latter provides physiological data and subjective information that the test conducted with a thermal manikin does not. However, the ASTM F2300-22 method is more subjective, more complex to analyse, and has lower reproducibility and repeatability [21]. In addition to standardised test methods, many studies utilise their testing protocols both in human subject tests [22,23,24,25,26] and with thermal manikins [27,28,29,30]. These differences in testing procedures highlight the lack of consensus on the most effective approach for accurately assessing the thermal comfort of personal cooling systems in the laboratory.
The most used equipment for evaluating the thermal insulation and breathability of clothing in laboratory conditions is the thermal manikin in Figure 1.
It is constructed in accordance with the standards ISO 15831-04 [31] and ASTM F2370-22 [32]. It can simulate the human body’s thermal properties by measuring the heat flux required to maintain a stable body temperature at a concrete set point within a controlled environment. In addition, it is possible to couple the thermal manikin from Thermetrics LLC. Seattle, WA, USA [33] with commercial software that simulates a person’s thermoregulatory system within the thermal manikin. The software, ManikinPC version 10.2, developed by Thermoanalytical Inc. Calumet, MI, USA [34], incorporates the thermophysiological prediction model developed by Fiala et al. [35,36] and the UC Berkeley Thermophysiological Comfort Model [37,38] within its framework. By utilising this simulation software along with thermal manikins, it is possible to evaluate a variety of physiological parameters, including local and overall skin temperature, as well as subjective factors such as thermal sensation and comfort [39,40].
Despite widespread adoption of thermal manikins for evaluating cooling garments, the correlation between manikin-based measurements and human thermal responses remains poorly defined, particularly for thermal sensation and perceived comfort. Previous research has predominantly focused on either manikin testing or human-subject experiments in isolation, with few experimental comparisons between the two methodologies conducted under comparable testing conditions. To create a standardised approach for assessing cooling garments in a laboratory environment, a testing protocol was developed that simultaneously examines both the physiological and psychological parameters of human subjects alongside a thermal manikin [41,42]. This protocol employs objective laboratory equipment to evaluate a subjective aspect of human thermal response. In this context, the present study aims to compare data obtained using this novel thermal manikin-based testing protocol with those from controlled experiments involving human subjects. A PCM cooling vest is introduced as a representative textile system to facilitate this comparison. By focusing on the consistency, applicability, and interpretation of thermal responses obtained from both experimental approaches, this study offers new methodological insights into the use of thermal manikins for assessing thermal comfort in functional and personal cooling textiles.

2. Materials and Methods

Two distinct test methods were employed for this validation, one using the thermal manikin and the other using human subjects. In both methods, the same test protocol for evaluating cooling garments has been followed.

2.1. Test Sample and Conditioning

According to the manufacturer, the PCM cooling vest tested is a biobased phase change material (PCM) produced from vegetable-based materials [43], is reusable, and does not produce condensation, making it suitable for use inside clothing next to the user’s body. Our research utilises a PCM cooling vest with a melting point of 24.0 °C.
This PCM cooling vest can be activated for 20 min in ice water, 40 min in the freezer, and 60 min in the refrigerator. Additionally, PCM vests can be activated, exposing them to any ambient temperature below 19.0 °C. In our study, it is conditioned for 40 min in a freezer at −30.0 °C before each test.

2.2. Environmental Conditions of Testing

In this study, the climatic chamber is set to 35.0 ± 0.5 °C, 40 ± 5% relative humidity, and 0.4 ± 0.1 m/s airspeed for both the manikin test and the human subject tests.

2.3. Measurement Items

In this study, one physiological parameter, skin temperature (Tsk), is evaluated in the torso area of both the manikin and human subjects, and two subjective parameters are measured: thermal sensation and comfort.
Thermal comfort is assessed on a 7-point scale from −3 (very uncomfortable) to 3 (very comfortable), as per ISO 10551-19 [44]. The thermal sensation is evaluated according to ASHRAE 55-20 [45] using a 7-point scale that ranges from −3 (cold sensation) to 3 (hot sensation). Table 1 presents the correlations between levels and meanings regarding thermal comfort and sensation.

2.4. Equipment

2.4.1. Thermal Manikin with ManikinPC

A thermal manikin is utilised for this research and consists of 34 segments from Thermetrics LLC. Seattle, WA, USA. It is paired with ManikinPC, a physiological simulation software. This manikin features a sweating system that mimics the human body’s perspiration mechanism. The system includes a water pump and tubes that distribute water across the manikin’s surface, which is clad in a second-skin suit to simulate human perspiration effectively.

2.4.2. Climatic Chamber

During the tests, a Walk-In climatic chamber is utilised to control environmental conditions.

2.4.3. Treadmill

The treadmill is used only in the human subject’s test protocol. It is used to simulate the metabolic heat produced during each specific activity. It is a NordicTrack S40I (NordicTrack, Logan, UT, USA) that can operate at speeds from 0 to 22 km/h and has a maximum incline of 12%.

2.4.4. Skin and Humidity Sensors

The sensor utilised is the DS1923 iButton temperature and humidity logger (Analog Devices, Wilmington, MA, USA). It operates within a temperature range of −20.0 °C to +85.0 °C and a relative humidity range of 0% to 100%. The device’s accuracy is ±0.09 °C and its precision is ±0.05 °C [46].

2.5. Test Protocol

2.5.1. Test Protocol Using the Thermal Manikin

The manikin is dressed in lightweight shorts (100% polyester, 127 g/m2) and a T-shirt (100% polyester, 132 g/m2), fitted according to the anthropometric dimensions of the standardised thermal manikin specified in ASTM F2371-24, which has a height of 170 ± 10 cm and a total surface area of 1.8 ± 0.3 m2. The geometric parameters of the garments are presented in Table 2 and were selected to ensure proper fit and geometric consistency with the manikin used in the experimental setup, as deviations in fit may influence thermal and physiological measurements.
The manikin is placed in the climate chamber under controlled environmental conditions, connected to the sweating system and to the ManikinPC software. At the start of each test, the manikin’s body must be in a thermoneutral state. This is accomplished using the software option labelled “Thermoneutral State”. This preliminary step confirms that the manikin is in a consistent neutral condition before each test, with an initial skin temperature of 34.4 °C in the climatic chamber at 35.0 °C.
In this study, three types of activities are simulated for 20 min each. To simulate them, it is necessary to incorporate the metabolic load of each activity into the software, which is the energy that the user’s body will generate while performing that activity. Table 3 presents the three types of activity levels simulated in this test protocol, along with their corresponding correlations with metabolic equivalents (METs), as defined in ISO 8996-21 [47].
Upon completion of the thermoneutral test, the manikin is outfitted with the PCM vest, and the simulation begins, starting with low metabolic rate activity of 1.4 METs for 20 min, followed by moderate metabolic rate activity of 2.8 METs for 20 min more, and concluding with the highest metabolic rate activity of 4 METs after 20 min.

2.5.2. Test Protocol Using Human Subjects

Participants
Five healthy male participants were recruited for this study. We have used the same number of human subjects as the standard ASTM F2300-22. Anthropometric characteristics are as follows: age 30 ± 3 years; height 179 ± 5 cm; mass 78.2 ± 4.1 kg. Before each test, participants completed a health questionnaire and provided written informed consent.
Experimental Procedure
The climatic chamber is set to the environmental conditions used in the test with the thermal manikin. Inside the chamber, a treadmill is in the centre to simulate the three activity levels with the participants. For this evaluation, the treadmill is adjusted to replicate the metabolic rates used in the thermal manikin test protocol: 1.4, 2.8, and 4.0 METs. The treadmill configurations used are detailed in Table 4.
Before the tests, participants are dressed in lightweight shorts and a T-shirt, which is the same attire used in the thermal manikin tests. The skin sensors are fixed to the participant’s torso, one in the left upper chest and the other in the right scapula, in contact with the skin and covered by the t-shirt. After that, the participant is positioned on the treadmill inside the climatic chamber and dressed with the PCM vest, which has been previously activated. The evaluation begins by setting the treadmill to 1.4 mph with a 30% incline, simulating low metabolic rate activity. After 20 min, it will transition to moderate metabolic rate activity, adjusting the treadmill speed to 1.9 mph and reducing the incline to 0%. Finally, the evaluation will conclude with a configuration for high metabolic rate activity, maintaining a speed of 1.9 mph while increasing the incline to 40%. Participants were asked to rate their overall thermal sensation and comfort for each simulated activity. Thermal sensation and thermal comfort are assessed every 20 min when the treadmill configuration changes, using a 7-point categorical scale for both, consistent with the manikin simulation software. The skin sensors record the skin temperature every minute until the test concludes.

3. Results

The results are presented to compare the thermal responses obtained through the thermal manikin-based testing protocol with those recorded during experiments involving human subjects under similar environmental and activity conditions. This analysis focuses on the quantitative correlations among skin temperature (Tsk), thermal sensation, and perceived comfort, which serve as critical indicators of the consistency between the two experimental methods.

3.1. Thermal Manikin Test

The results of the skin temperature of the torso of the manikin, thermal comfort level, and thermal sensation of the manikin are reported in Table 5.
The findings regarding the thermal sensation levels and the thermal comfort levels are presented as follows:
  • At a light activity of 1.4 METs, both the thermal sensation level and the thermal comfort level are measured at 0, suggesting a neutral thermal sensation and a state of comfort, respectively.
  • With a moderate activity of 2.8 METs, the thermal sensation level increases to 1, indicating a slightly hot feeling, accompanied by a thermal comfort level that dips to −1, suggesting a marginally somewhat uncomfortable experience.
  • The heat-flux saturation point was identified at a metabolic load of 4.0 MET. At this threshold, the bio-PCM’s latent heat discharge capacity was exceeded by the body’s heat production, as evidenced by the sharp rise in Tsk to 37.1 °C and the corresponding decline in thermal comfort to −2 (uncomfortable) and a sensation of 2 (warm).

3.2. Human Subject Test

The results of the skin temperature (Tsk), thermal sensation levels, and thermal comfort levels for the average participants are presented in Table 6.
These are the findings regarding the thermal sensation levels and the thermal comfort levels in the human subject tests:
  • At a light activity of 1.4 METs, both the thermal sensation level and the thermal comfort level are 0, suggesting a neutral thermal sensation and comfort.
  • At a moderate activity of 2.8 METs, the thermal sensation level increases to 1, indicating a slightly hot feeling, accompanied by a thermal comfort of −1, suggesting a somewhat uncomfortable state.
  • At a metabolic rate of 4.0 METs, the thermal sensation index reaches 2 (warm), while thermal comfort drops to −2 (uncomfortable). This shift indicates that the heat-flux saturation point has been reached, where the garment’s cooling capacity is exceeded by the body’s heat production.

4. Discussion

In human subject tests, the relationship between skin temperature and subjective thermal sensation and thermal comfort is clear. As skin temperature rises, participants experience a decline in both thermal sensation and thermal comfort. This is because when skin temperature increases, there is less heat exchange between the core and the skin, resulting in higher body temperature and increased body heat. With this increase in internal temperature, the person feels hotter and more uncomfortable. This relationship has also been observed in tests using a thermal manikin: across all tested activity levels, the manikin’s measurements exhibit trends comparable to those observed in human subjects.
As shown in Table 7, there is a strong correlation between the human subjects’ physiological responses and the manikin’s simulated data. The results establish that:
  • At 1.4 METs, the PCM system maintains a neutral thermal state with a minimal deviation of 0.2 °C between models.
  • At 4.0 METs, the thermal sensation index increases to 2 (warm) and thermal comfort drops to −2 (uncomfortable). This identifies the heat-flux saturation point, at which the body’s metabolic heat production exceeds the PCM vest’s latent heat absorption capacity.
  • The maximum deviation in skin temperature between the manikin test and the human subjects test is 0.2 °C. This variation is consistent with the allowable difference outlined in the thermal manikin standard ISO 15831-04, which specifies a mean absolute error in skin temperature of ±0.2 °C.
Consequently, the accuracy of this manikin-based methodology in capturing thermal transition levels across varying metabolic loads is scientifically validated at a 0.2 °C threshold.

Limitations and Future Considerations

The current study acknowledges certain limitations that future research will effectively address to refine the test protocol. Key constraints include a small sample size of five male participants and reliance on a single design of the personal cooling vest, which limits the broader applicability of the findings. To strengthen the testing methodology, future investigations should involve a larger, more diverse participant pool encompassing various genders and age groups. Moreover, exploring the different types of personal cooling systems available on the market and conducting tests across a range of environmental conditions will be essential for obtaining comprehensive results.

5. Conclusions

This study investigates the applicability of a thermal manikin-based testing methodology for evaluating the thermal effects of personal cooling garments by systematically comparing its outcomes with those obtained from controlled experiments involving human subjects. The primary contribution of this work lies in the quantified methodological assessment of the consistency between these two experimental approaches.
The results demonstrate that the proposed manikin-based testing protocol accurately reproduces key thermal trends observed in human-subject experiments, specifically skin temperature evolution (Tsk), thermal sensation, and perceived comfort across varying metabolic loads. A critical finding is the manikin’s high precision in tracking Tsk, with a maximum deviation of only 0.2 °C. In both settings, the data established that the PCM’s cooling effect effectively delays skin temperature rise, particularly under low metabolic conditions. This concordance provides definitive experimental evidence that the thermal manikin, when integrated with physiological simulation, serves as a high-fidelity surrogate for human trials, offering a robust scientific basis for testing the performance of advanced cooling textiles.
Furthermore, the proposed methodology represents a critical advancement for evaluating the thermal performance of cooling garments in extreme scenarios where the safety of the human subjects cannot be guaranteed. Beyond its immediate application, this study provides a robust scientific foundation for the development of future standardised protocols for the objective assessment of user thermal comfort using personal cooling systems. By bridging the gap between manikin measurements and physiological responses, this approach serves as a starting point for a more reliable, reproducible international standard for evaluating the performance of personal cooling systems under rigorous laboratory conditions.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.M.-A. and E.B.-B.; methodology, M.M.-A. and E.B.-B.; validation, M.M.-A.; formal analysis, M.M.-A.; investigation, M.M.-A.; resources, M.M.-A.; writing—original draft preparation, M.M.-A.; writing—review and editing, all authors; supervision, E.B.-B., R.B.-A. and D.M.-G.; and funding acquisition, E.B.-B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of AITEX (AITEX-2025-01-CE) on [15 October 2025]. Informed consent was obtained from all participants before their participation.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

Data Availability Statement

The raw data supporting the conclusions of the article are available on request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Ren, S.; Han, M.; Fang, J. Personal Cooling Garments: A Review. Polymers 2022, 14, 5522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  2. Brotherhood, J.R. Heat Stress and Strain in Exercise and Sport. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2008, 11, 6–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  3. Pascoe, D.D.; Shanley, L.A.; Smith, E.W. Clothing and exercise: Part I. Biophysics of heat transfer between the individual, clothing, and environment. Sports Med. 1994, 18, 38–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  4. Raymond, C.; Matthews, T.; Horton, R.M. The emergence of heat and humidity too severe for human tolerance. Sci. Adv. 2020, 6, eaaw1838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  5. Lan, L.; Wargocki, P.; Wyon, D.P.; Lian, Z. Effects of thermal discomfort in an office on perceived air quality, SBS symptoms, physiological responses, and human performance. Indoor Air 2011, 21, 376–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  6. EN 342:2017; Protective Clothing. Ensembles and Garments for Protection Against Cold. CEN: Brussels, Belgium, 2023.
  7. Bach, A.J.E.; Maley, M.J.; Minett, G.M.; Zietek, S.A.; Stewart, K.L.; Stewart, I.B. An Evaluation of Personal Cooling Systems for Reducing Thermal Strain Whilst Working in Chemical/Biological Protective Clothing. Front. Physiol. 2019, 10, 424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  8. Ma, Y.; Wan, Q.; Gong, Z.; Wu, Y.; Zhou, J. Current Research Status and Development Trends of Cooling Suits in High-Temperature Mine Environments: A Review. Processes 2023, 11, 3256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  9. Rahimi, E.; Babapoor, A.; Moradi, G.; Kalantary, S.; Esmaeelpour, M. Personal cooling garments and phase change materials: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2024, 190, 114063. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  10. He, T.H.; Ren, Y.Y.; Tian, J.Y.; Zhou, Y.J.; Cheng, Y.Q. Evaluate the Cooling Effect of Cooling Garments: A Review. J. Nat. Fibers 2024, 21, 2405898. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  11. Gao, C.; Kuklane, K.; Holmer, I. Cooling vests with phase change material packs: The effects of temperature gradient, mass and covering area. Ergonomics 2010, 53, 716–723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  12. Peng, L.; Su, B.; Xuchuan, A. Review of clothing for thermal management with advanced materials. Cellulose 2019, 26, 6415–6448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  13. Wang, F.; Pang, D.; Liu, X.; Liu, M.; Du, W.; Zhang, Y.; Cheng, X. Progress in application of phase-change materials to cooling clothing. J. Energy Storage 2023, 60, 106606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  14. Herrera, P.; De la Hoz Siegler, H.; Clarke, M. Fatty Acids as Phase Change Materials for Building Applications: Drawbacks and Future Developments. Energies 2024, 17, 4880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  15. Su, Y.; Zhu, W.; Tian, M.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, X.; Li, J. Intelligent bidirectional thermal regulation of phase change material incorporated in thermal protective clothing. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2020, 174, 115340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  16. Gong, X.; Dang, G.; Guo, J.; Liu, Y.; Gong, Y. Sodium alginate/feather keratin-g-allyloxy polyethylene glycol composite phase change fiber. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 131, 192–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  17. Mekrisuh, K.; Singh, D.; Raj, U. Development and experimental validation of a 3D numerical model to investigate performance of phase change based cooling vest in hot environments. Int. J. Therm. Sci. 2025, 208, 109487. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  18. House, J.R.; Lunt, H.C.; Taylor, R.; Milligan, G.; Lyons, J.A.; House, C.M. The impact of a phase-change cooling vest on heat strain and the effect of different cooling pack melting temperatures. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 2013, 113, 1223–1231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  19. ASTM F2371; Standard Test Method for Measuring the Heat Removal Rate of Personal Cooling Systems Using a Sweating Heated Manikin. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2024.
  20. ASTM F2300; Standard Test Method for Measuring the Performance of Personal Cooling Systems Using Physiological Testing. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2022.
  21. Decaens, J.; Vermeersch, O. Specific testing for smart textiles. In Advanced Characterization and Testing of Textiles; the Textile Institute Book Series; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2018; pp. 351–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  22. Aljaroudi, A.M.; Kadis, D.S.; Bhattacharya, A.; Strauch, A.; Quinn, T.D.; Williams, W.J. Effect of continuous cooling on inhibition and attention while wearing firefighter’s PPE in a hot environment. J. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 2020, 17, 243–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  23. Tokizawa, K.; Son, S.Y.; Oka, T.; Yasuda, A. Effectiveness of a field-type liquid cooling vest for reducing heat strain while wearing protective clothing. Ind. Health 2020, 58, 63–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  24. Gutiérrez-Arroyo, J.; Rodríguez-Marroyo, J.A.; García-Heras, F.; Rodríguez-Medina, J.; Collado, P.S.; Villa-Vicente, J.G.; Carballo-Leyenda, B. Effects of cooling vest and personal protective equipment removal on thermoregulation in wildland firefighters during progressive thermal loads. Front. Public Health 2024, 12, 1408591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  25. Colburn, D.; Suyama, J.; Reis, S.E.; Morley, J.L.; Goss, F.L.; Chen, Y.F.; Moore, C.G.; Hostler, D. A comparison of cooling techniques in firefighters after a live burn evolution. Prehospital Emerg. Care 2011, 15, 226–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  26. Lubosz, A.; Smoliło, J.; Chmiela, M.; Chmiela, A.; Gajdzik, M.; Smoliński, A. Assessment of the benefits of cooling vests on working conditions of mine operators in hard climatic conditions: A case study. J. Ind. Saf. 2024, 1, 100001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  27. Kim, S.; Lee, S.; Shin, S. Cooling performance measurements of different types of cooling vests using thermal manikin. Fash. Text. 2024, 11, 15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  28. Ciuha, U.; Valenčič, T.; Mekjavic, I.B. Cooling efficiency of vests with different cooling concepts over 8-hour trials. Ergonomics 2020, 64, 625–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  29. Farnham, C.; Yuan, J.; Emura, K. Evaluation of the Cooling Effect of an Outdoor Misting Fan for Workers in Hot Environments Wearing Personal Protective Equipment (PPE). Clean Technol. 2025, 7, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  30. Yuting, L.; Xiaoshan, Y.; Shouxin, Z.; Jiachen, N.; Xinglan, W.; Ting, Z.; Xiaohui, Z.; Suqin, C. High-efficiency application area in China of evaporative cooling garments: Effects of solar radiation and wind speed. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2025, 269, 125977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  31. ISO 15831; Clothing—Physiological Effects—Measurement of Thermal Insulation by Means of a Thermal Manikin. Standard Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2004.
  32. ASTM F2370; Standard Test Method for Measuring the Evaporative Resistance of Clothing Using a Sweating Manikin. ASTM International: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2022.
  33. Thermetrics: Advanced Thermal Measurement Technology. Available online: https://thermetrics.com/ (accessed on 25 October 2025).
  34. Thermoanalytics Inc. Available online: https://www.thermoanalytics.com/ (accessed on 2 October 2025).
  35. Fiala, D.; Lomas, K.J.; Stohrer, M. A computer model of human thermoregulation for a wide range of environmental conditions: The passive system. J. Appl. Physiol. 1999, 87, 1957–1972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  36. Fiala, D.; Lomas, K.; Stohrer, M. Computer prediction of human thermoregulatory and temperature responses to a wide range of environmental conditions. Int. J. Biometeorol. 2001, 45, 143–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  37. Huizenga, C.; Hui, Z.; Arens, E. A model of human physiology and comfort for assessing complex thermal environments. Build. Environ. 2001, 36, 691–699. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  38. Zhang, H.; Huizenga, C.; Arens, E.; Tiefeng, Y. Considering individual physiological differences in a human thermal model. J. Therm. Biol. 2001, 26, 401–408. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  39. Psikuta, A.; Weibel, M.; Burke, R.; Hepokoski, M.; Schwenn, T.; Annaheim, S.; Rossi, R.M. A Systematic Approach to the Development and Validation of Adaptive Manikins. Extrem. Physiol. Med. 2015, 4, A15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  40. Burke, R.; Blood, K.; Deaton, A.S.; Barker, R. Application of Model-Controlled Manikin to Predict Human Physiological Response in Firefighter Turnout Gear Paper Presentation. In Proceedings of the Eighth International Meeting for Manikins and Modelling, Victoria, BC, Canada, 22–26 August 2010. [Google Scholar]
  41. Martinez-Albert, M.; Diaz-Garcia, P.; Bou-Belda, E. Development of a new testing protocol to evaluate cooling systems. EXCLI J. 2023, 22, 583–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit] [PubMed]
  42. Martinez-Albert, M.; Diaz-Garcia, P.; Montava-Segui, I.J.; Bou-Belda, E. Experimental Investigation into the Thermal Performance of Personal Cooling Mechanisms. Appl. Sci. 2025, 15, 3296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  43. Inuteq. Available online: https://inuteq.com/pcm-coolover-24c/#white (accessed on 3 March 2026).
  44. ISO 10551-1; Ergonomics of the Physical Environment—Subjective Judgment Scales for Assessing Physical Environments. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2019.
  45. ANSI/ASHRAE 55; Thermal Environmental Conditions for Human Occupancy. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air Conditioning Engineers (ASHRAE): Peachtree Corners, GA, USA, 2020.
  46. Van Marken Lichtenbelt, W.D.; Daanen, H.A.; Wouters, L.; Fronczek, R.; Raymann, R.J.; Severens, N.M.; Van Someren, E.J. Evaluation of wireless determination of skin temperature using iButtons. Physiol. Behav. 2006, 88, 489–497. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Scilit]
  47. ISO 8996; Ergonomics of the Thermal Environment—Determination of Metabolic Rate. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021.
Textiles 06 00059 g001
Figure 1. Thermal manikin.
Figure 1. Thermal manikin.
Textiles 06 00059 g001
Table 1. Seven-point scale of thermal comfort per standard ISO 10551-19 and thermal sensation per standard ASHRAE 55-20.
Table 1. Seven-point scale of thermal comfort per standard ISO 10551-19 and thermal sensation per standard ASHRAE 55-20.
LevelsThermal ComfortThermal Sensation
−3Very uncomfortableCold
−2UncomfortableCool
−1Slightly uncomfortableSlightly cool
0NeutralNeutral
1Slightly comfortableSlightly warm
2ComfortableWarm
3Very comfortableHot
Table 2. Geometric parameters of the underwear used for the tests.
Table 2. Geometric parameters of the underwear used for the tests.
GarmentParametersValue
T-shirtCommercial sizeM
Chest circumference96 cm
Shoulder width46 cm
Sleeve length20 cm
Shirt length66 cm
Hem circumference96 cm
ShortsCommercial sizeM
Waist circumference80 cm
Hip circumference100 cm
Short length40 cm
Leg opening circumference60 cm
Table 3. Relation between activity level and metabolic rate according to standard ISO 8996-21.
Table 3. Relation between activity level and metabolic rate according to standard ISO 8996-21.
Activity LevelRange of Metabolic Rate
(W)		Range of Metabolic Rate
(METs)		Metabolic Rate Used in the Software (METs)
Low metabolic rate125–2351.2–2.21.4
Moderate metabolic rate235–3602.2–3.42.8
High metabolic rate360–4653.4–4.44.0
Table 4. Configuration of the treadmill based on activity levels.
Table 4. Configuration of the treadmill based on activity levels.
Activity Level
Simulated		Metabolic Rate
Used in the
Software
(W)		Metabolic Rate
Used in the
Software
(METs)		Velocity of the
Treadmill
(mph)		Grade of Inclination of the
Treadmill
(%)
Low metabolic rate1471.41.430
Moderate metabolic rate2932.81.90
High metabolic rate4194.01.940
Table 5. Skin temperature of the manikin’s torso, thermal comfort, and thermal sensation by activity.
Table 5. Skin temperature of the manikin’s torso, thermal comfort, and thermal sensation by activity.
Range of
Metabolic Rate
(METs)		Overall Skin Temperature
Tsk (°C)		Thermal Sensation
Level		Thermal Comfort
Level
1.434.800
2.836.21−1
4.037.12−2
Table 6. Skin temperature (Tsk), thermal sensation levels and thermal comfort levels of the participants’ torsos during various activities.
Table 6. Skin temperature (Tsk), thermal sensation levels and thermal comfort levels of the participants’ torsos during various activities.
Range of
Metabolic Rate
(METs)		Overall Skin Temperature
Tsk (°C)		Thermal Sensation
Level		Thermal Comfort
Level
1.435.000
2.836.31−1
4.036.92−2
Table 7. Comparison of thermal responses between human subjects and thermal manikin across different metabolic rates.
Table 7. Comparison of thermal responses between human subjects and thermal manikin across different metabolic rates.
Range of
Metabolic Rate
(METs)		Subject
Tsk (°C)		Manikin
Tsk (°C)		Deviation
(°C)		Thermal
Sensation
Level		Thermal
Comfort
Level
1.435.034.80.20 (Neutral)0 (Neutral)
2.836.336.20.11 (Slightly warm)−1 (Slightly Uncomf.)
4.036.937.10.22 (Warm)−2 (Uncomfortable)
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Martínez-Albert, M.; Belda-Anaya, R.; Mínguez-García, D.; Bou-Belda, E. Towards Standardised Evaluation of Cooling Garments: Validation of a Novel Test Protocol. Textiles 2026, 6, 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/textiles6020059

AMA Style

Martínez-Albert M, Belda-Anaya R, Mínguez-García D, Bou-Belda E. Towards Standardised Evaluation of Cooling Garments: Validation of a Novel Test Protocol. Textiles. 2026; 6(2):59. https://doi.org/10.3390/textiles6020059

Chicago/Turabian Style

Martínez-Albert, Miriam, Raquel Belda-Anaya, David Mínguez-García, and Eva Bou-Belda. 2026. "Towards Standardised Evaluation of Cooling Garments: Validation of a Novel Test Protocol" Textiles 6, no. 2: 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/textiles6020059

APA Style

Martínez-Albert, M., Belda-Anaya, R., Mínguez-García, D., & Bou-Belda, E. (2026). Towards Standardised Evaluation of Cooling Garments: Validation of a Novel Test Protocol. Textiles, 6(2), 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/textiles6020059

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop