Shim, Huensup, McCullough, Elizabeth A., and Jones, Byron W.

, The Use of Phase Change

Materials in Clothing, Textile Research Journal, Vol. 71, No. 6, June 2001, pp. 495-502.
The Use of Phase Change Materials in Clothing
H. SHIM, E. A. MCCULLOUGH, AND B. W. JONES
Institute for Environmental Research, Kansas State University,
Manhattan, KS 66506 U.S.A.
ABSTRACT
When microcapsules of phase change materials (PCMs) are added to textiles, they absorb
heat energy as they change from a solid to a liquid state and release heat as they return to a solid
state. This project quantified the effect of PCMs in clothing on heat flow from the body during
temperature transients. One and two layer body suits were constructed of a fabric/foam laminate
produced with and without PCMs. Heat loss from a thermal manikin was measured as he was
moved from a warm chamber to a cold chamber and back again. The results indicated that the
heating and cooling effects lasted approximately 15 minutes. The heat released by PCMs in a
cold environment decreased body heat loss by an average 6.5 W for a one layer suit and by 13.2
W for a two layer suit as compared to their non-PCM counterparts. The PCM cooling effects
increased body heat loss in a similar manner. In conclusion, PCMs in clothing provide a small,
temporary heat/cooling effect during environmental transients.

In 1987, scientists developed and patented the technology for incorporating microencapsulated phase change materials (PCMs) inside textile fibers to improve their thermal
performance [3]. PCMs store and release thermal energy as they go through solid-liquid
transitions. The PCMs used in textiles are paraffins (e.g., octadecane, eicosane) with different
melting and crystallization (i.e., freezing) points. By changing the proportionate amounts of
different paraffins in the phase change material, the desired melting and freezing points can be
obtained. For use in textiles, PCMs are enclosed in a protective wrapping, or microcapsule, a
few microns in diameter. The microcapsule prevents leakage of the material during its liquid
phase. Microcapsules of phase change materials can be incorporated into the spinning dope of
manufacturered fibers (e.g., acrylic), incorporated into the structure of foams, and coated onto
fabrics.
Background Information
HOW PCMS WORK IN CLOTHING
When the encapsulated PCM is heated to the melting point, it absorbs heat energy as it
goes from a solid state to a liquid state. This phase change produces a temporary cooling effect
in the clothing layers. The heat energy may come from the body or from the environment. Once
the PCM has completely melted, the storage of heat stops. If the PCM garment is worn in an
environment where the temperature is below the PCMs freezing point and the fabric temperature
drops below the freezing point, the micro-encapsulated liquid PCM will change back to a solid
state, releasing heat energy and generating a temporary warming effect. The developers claim
that this heat exchange produces a buffering effect in clothing, minimizing changes in skin
temperature and prolonging the thermal comfort of the wearer. However, most of the published
research that is available in the scientific literature was conducted on small pieces of fabric not
on garments -- by individuals employed by PCM licensors and producers [4, 5, 6, 7].
The developers and producers of phase change materials in textiles claim that garments
made with PCMs will keep a person warm longer than conventional insulations when worn in

cold environments. They also claim that the use of PCMs in outdoor clothing will decrease the
thickness and weight of the clothing required [7]. There is no question that a phase change
material will store heat energy as it changes from a solid to a liquid, and liberate heat when it
changes from a liquid to a solid. However, in order for a phase change material to improve the
thermal comfort characteristics of a clothing ensemble in a cold environment, it must release
enough heat in the garment layers to reduce the heat loss from the body to the environment.
Even if all of the garments in a clothing ensemble were treated with the PCM, not all of the PCM
microcapsules would go through phase changes when the wearer went from an indoor
environment to a cold environment and/or varied his/her activity. Heat flows from the warm
body to the cooler environment, and there is a temperature gradient from the skin surface through
the clothing layers to the environment. The PCM microcapsules in the outermost clothing layer
will not reach skin temperature, no matter how much body heat is produced during exercise. The
PCMs closest to the body (e.g., in long underwear or socks) will probably remain close to skin
temperature and stay in the liquid state. The PCMs in the outermost layers of clothing will
probably get cold and solidify, thus producing some heat. However, in the outer layers of
clothing, much of the heat released will flow to the cold environment and the effect on body heat
loss will be reduced accordingly. Once the PCM has changed from a liquid to a solid, the
liberation of heat energy is over and will not continue. Therefore, the magnitude and duration of
the heating and cooling effects of phase change materials in garments worn in different
configurations on the body need to be documented.
EFFECT OF PCMS ON TEXTILE PROPERTIES
The addition of the phase change materials to fibers, fabrics, or foams increases the
weight of the resulting textile structures [5, 6] and decreases the strength and elongation of
fabrics [3]. Changes in physical properties will vary depending upon what percentage of PCM
by weight is used in the textile, and they should be measured prior to use in garments.
Purpose
Currently, phase change materials are being used in a variety of outdoor apparel items

(e.g., gloves, jackets, earmuffs, etc.) under the trade names Outlast and ComforTempR. Their
use in heat protective clothing is being investigated also. The addition of PCMs to fibers, foams,
and fabrics substantially increases the price of the textile. The price increase varies based on the
volume being produced and the percent by weight of PCM that is added. Considering product
safety, performance, and cost issues, the effect of PCMs on the heat transfer properties of
garments should be investigated prior to their use.
The purpose of this project was to quantify the effect of phase change materials (PCMs)
in fabric-backed foam materials on selected fabric characteristics and on heat loss from a thermal
manikins surface to the environment during environmental temperature transients. Specifically,
the effect of the number of garment layers in the clothing system, the orientation of the PCM
layer to the body, and the amount of body coverage on the effectiveness of the PCMs in
modifying body heat loss were measured.

Methodology
MATERIALS AND GARMENTS
An open-cell, hydrophilic, expanded polyurethane foam -- produced with and without
PCMs -- was used in this study. The material was produced by casting a foam emulsion of
polyurethane directly onto a base fabric of polyester knitted fleece and curing it via normal CO
outgassing. The experimental foam contained of an optimum level of 60% PCM
microcapsules. The highest add-on level reported in other studies was 30% [3]. Approximately
40% of the PCM microcapsules contained octadecane and changed phase at 28.3EC, and 60% of
them contained hexadecane and changed phase at 18.3EC.
The experimental suits for the manikin tests consisted of a long-sleeved, fitted top and
pair of long pants. Two sets of these garments were produced in both the experimental and
control materials (i.e., four suits total). The second set of garments was slightly larger than the
first to minimize compression when they were worn over the first set. The PCM treated foam
side of the fabric was on the outside of each garment (i.e., away from the body). The garments in

the ensemble were designed to minimize overlap so that the layering effects of treated and
untreated garments could be controlled. The manikins head was covered with a knitted wool hat.
His hands were covered with knitted polyester fleece gloves. His feet were covered with ankle
length knitted acrylic socks and athletic shoes. Manikin tests were conducted on one layer and
two layer suits in various configurations.
Ski jackets and ski pants were produced for the manikin tests so that garments typically
worn by people could be evaluated. The ski garments were made of the same fabric-backed
foam as the experimental suits. A woven nylon shell fabric was used as the outside layer in the
garments. The jackets were worn with a 50% cotton/50% polyester, long-sleeve, turtleneck
knitted shirt and the auxiliary garments described earlier.
MEASUREMENT OF PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
The textile samples were conditioned at the standard temperature of 21EC and relative
humidity (65%) at least 24 hours prior to testing, according to ASTM D 1776 [1].

Fabric

stiffness was measured according to ASTM D 1388. Four specimens measuring 2.54 cm x 20
cm were cut from each fabric with the long direction parallel to the wales and four with the long
direction parallel to the courses. To conduct a test, a specimen was moved parallel to its long
dimension on the platform of the cantilever and allowed to bend 41.5E under its own weight.
Then the overall flexural rigidity (i.e., stiffness) was calculated. Fabric thickness was measured
according to ASTM D 1777, using a pressure foot 7.6 cm in diameter under 0.117 kPa of
pressure. The average thickness was determined from 10 readings on each fabric. Fabric weight
was measured according to ASTM D 3776, using option C on a small swatch of fabric. Two
specimens measuring 13 cm x 13 cm were weighed on a balance. The mean weight per unit area
for each fabric was reported. Fabric flammability was measured using the oxygren index method
given in ASTM D 2863. Oxygen Index is defined as the minimum concentration of oxygen,
expressed as volume percent, in a mixture of oxygen and nitrogen that will support flaming
combustion of a material initially at room temperature under equilibrium conditions of candlelike burning. Ten specimens measuring 5.1 cm x 12.7 cm were tested, and the average oxygen

index values for the fabrics were reported. The lower the OI value, the higher the flammability of
a fabric.
The fabric insulation value (i.e., resistance to dry heat transfer) was measured using the
constant temperature method specified in Part A of ASTM F 1868 [1]. The hot plate
measurement section was a 25.4 cm x 25.4 cm square surrounded by a 12.7 cm guard section.
The three specimens measuring 50.8 cm x 50.8 cm were conditioned and tested at a 20EC air
temperature, 65% relative humidity (13EC dew point temperature), with 0.7 m/s average air
velocity under the hood. The plate temperature was maintained at 35EC. Each fabric was placed
on the horizontal, flat plate so that the fleece side was next to the plate. When the temperatures
were within their tolerance limits and the system had reached steady-state, the system was
allowed to stay at equilibrium for one hour. Then data were collected by computer for 30
minutes. Three replications of the test were conducted.
The total resistance to dry heat transfer (Rt) for a fabric including the air film resistance
was calculated as

Rt =

Ts - Ta
A
H

11\* MERGEFORMAT ()

where
Rt = total resistance to dry heat transfer provided by the fabric and air layer, m@EC/W
A = area of the plate test section, m
Ts = surface temperature of the plate, EC
Ta = air temperature, EC
H = heat flow, W
The insulation value for the fabric alone (Rf) was determined by subtracting the mean dry
resistance value measured for the air layer (i.e., bare plate test) from the mean Rt.
The evaporative resistance of the fabrics was measured using the method specified in Part

B of ASTM F 1868. A liquid barrier (PTFE film laminated to a tricot knit fabric) was placed on
the plate to prevent the water (which is supplied through the porous metal in the plate surface)
from wetting the fabric. In this way, the fabric sample was only exposed to water vapor, not
liquid water. The procedures were basically the same as those for the dry tests. However, the air
temperature was the same as the plate temperature so that there was no temperature gradient for
dry heat loss. This is called an isothermal test. A dew point temperature of 19EC was used to
achieve 40% relative humidity at 35EC.
The total resistance to evaporative heat transfer provided by the liquid barrier, fabric, and
air film was calculated as

R e,t =

Ps

- Pa A
H

22\* MERGEFORMAT ()

where
Re,t = total resistance to evaporative heat transfer provided by the fabric and air layer,
mkPa/W
A = area of the plate test section, m
Ps = water vapor pressure at the plate surface, kPa
Pa = water vapor pressure in the air, kPa
H = power input, W
Data from the three replications of the wet tests were averaged to determine the mean Re,t
for each fabric (including the air layer and liquid barrier) and for the air layer and liquid barrier
alone. The resistance to evaporative heat transfer provided by the fabric alone (Re,f) was
determined by subtracting the mean evaporative resistance value measured for the air layer and
liquid barrier (i.e., bare plate covered with liquid barrier) from the mean Re,t.
ENVIRONMENTAL STEP CHANGE TESTS WITH A MANIKIN
A life-size, computerized, thermal manikin (Fred) was used to simulate the heat loss from
a human being to a cooler environment and to measure the insulation (clo) value of the clothing

systems. Fred is a full-size male manikin with a surface area of 1.8 m2 and 18 electrically
separate segments which provide independent temperature control and measurement. The
manikins skin temperature distribution corresponds to the temperatures on different parts of the
body when a person is sedentary and comfortable.
In order to make the phase change materials go from liquid to solid and vice versa, they
must go through a temperature change, and a transient test must be conducted. The
environmental temperature transient was achieved by using two adjacent environmental
chambers. One chamber simulated a warm indoor environment: 25EC air temperature, 14EC
dew point temperature (50% relative humidity), and < 0.2 m/s air velocity. For the warm
condition, we selected the highest indoor temperature that would still permit heat loss from all
of Freds body segments when he was dressed in the most insulative ensemble. Another chamber
simulated a cold outdoor environment: 10EC air temperature, 6EC dew point temperature (75%
relative humidity), and < 0.2 m/s air velocity. For the cold condition, we selected the lowest
outdoor temperature that would allow Freds body segments to reach their set points at steadystate when he was dressed in the least insulative ensemble.
An overhead track was mounted between the two chambers, and the manikin hung from
this track on a roller hooked to his head. This arrangement allowed the manikin to be moved
from one chamber to the other very quickly (i.e., 1 - 2 minutes) and with minimal disruption.
The air temperature and dew point temperature were measured continuously in each chamber.
The garments were conditioned in the warm chamber. To conduct a test, the manikin was placed
in the warm chamber and dressed in a specific set of garments. For the tests, the manikin was
heated to an average skin temperature of 33EC.
Equilibrium was maintained for at least 1 hour prior to testing. First, the insulation (clo)
value of the clothing and the average level of body heat loss were measured according to ASTM
F 1291 [1]. Data were collected by computer every 30 seconds for a 30 minute test. The total
thermal insulation value of the clothing plus the surrounding air layer was calculated using
Equation 1. Clothing insulation is normally described in clo units, where 1 clo = 0.155

m@EC/W.
The amount of power that it takes to keep the manikin heated to the proper skin
temperature is equal to the amount of heat loss from his body surface at steady-state. After the
baseline insulation and heat loss data were collected under steady-state conditions in the indoor
environment, the manikin was moved quickly to the adjacent cold chamber. The power level to
the manikin was recorded every minute during the transient. After the transient was over, the
insulation value and the average power level at steady-state in the cold environment were
measured again. The process was repeated as the manikin was moved back to the warm chamber.
The entire transient test took about six hours. Two replications of each test were conducted.
Results
PHYSICAL PROPERTIES
The properties of the PCM foam and the control are given in Table I. The PCM foam had
a higher insulation value than the control foam because it was slightly thicker. However, the
PCM foam had a lower insulation per unit thickness value and a lower insulation per unit weight
value, probably because the PCMs increased the density of the foam. The evaporative resistance
was also higher in the PCM foam because it was thicker and because the PCM microcapsules
displaced air in the foam structure and inhibited diffusion. This might be a problem when PCMs
are coated on fabrics also, but it should not be a problem when PCMs are put inside
manufactured fibers.
The PCM foam had a higher weight and stiffness than the control foam. The PCM foam
was more flammable than the control foam also. The PCM foam had an oxygen index value of
18.5 which was similar to that of a cotton fabric.
Therefore, the addition of the PCM to the fabric-backed foam altered its properties as
compared to those of the fabric-backed foam without PCMs. These changes -- although small -are usually not desirable for clothing applications.
RESULTS OF STEADY-STATE MANIKIN TESTS
The average insulation values for the experimental PCM suits were slightly higher than

those measured for the control suits without PCM. The one layer PCM suit was 1.57 clo, and
the control without PCM was 1.48 clo. The two layer PCM suit was 2.07 clo, and the control
was 1.95 clo. The PCM fabric-backed foam had a slightly higher insulation value, as measured in
the hot plate test, which may account for the differences in clothing insulation.
The insulation values for the ski ensemble produced with and without PCM were the
same (2.19 clo). The ski ensemble fit more loosely and had more air layers between the
garments compared to the tight-fitting experimental suits. The air layers have a major effect on
the thermal insulation of a clothing system, and they were about the same in both ensembles
since the same pattern was used to make them. Also the auxiliary garments (e.g., hat and gloves)
were the same in both ensembles. Therefore, small differences in the fabric insulation did not
have much effect on the overall ensemble insulation.
TREATMENT OF TRANSIENT MANIKIN DATA
Heat loss data from two replications of the environmental transient tests with the manikin
were averaged for each minute of the data collection period. Data were collected for 1 hour in
each chamber, but only the first 30 minutes were graphed because the effect of the PCM was
usually over in 15 minutes. Data collected in both replications of the experiment indicated that
the procedure produced repeatable data.
The experimental suits with and without the PCM were not exactly identical with
respect to their heat loss and insulation values under steady-state conditions. Therefore, the heat
loss curves for the PCM suits were slightly lower than they would have been if they had been
identical to the control suits. (See Figures 1 and 2.) To correct this problem, the average heat
loss measured for each suit at steady-state in the cold condition was used in the following
equation to adjust the warm to cold transient curves:

where
P = power (W)

t = time (min)
PCM

= with phase change material

no

= without phase change material

ss

= steady-state condition

D = difference in heat loss (W)

The P(t)PCM - P(t)no term in Equation 3 is the measured difference in heat loss during the
transient. The term P(ss)PCM, cold - P(ss)no, cold is the difference in heat loss at steady state and is
subtracted from the transient value to correct for the fact that the insulation of the PCM and noPCM clothing is not identical. The reported results are averages for two replications for both
transient and steady-state measurements. Equation 3 was also used to generate the cold to warm
transient curves with the steady-state warm values replacing the steady-state cold values.
The manikin used in this research was designed for stable operation. When the manikin
is subjected to step changes, there is some overshooting of the control system. As a result, the
power level oscillates before it settles to the new level. These oscillations do not reflect
oscillations in the heat loss which changes smoothly. Consequently, the instantaneous heat loss
from the manikin is not equal to the instantaneous power consumption. Accurate evaluation of
the heat loss requires that the power input be averaged over a period of time sufficient to average
out the oscillations. Some compromising was required because the transient lasted only a short
time. A 15 minute averaging period was selected. It is approximately equal to the time duration
of the transient and approximately equal to one complete period of the oscillation. Additionally,
a time period of less than 15 minutes has little meaning with respect to the usefulness of the
heating/cooling effect for most applications. For these reasons, all of the comparisons are
reported as the 15 minute integrated average of the instantaneous differences calculated with
Equation 3. (See Table II.)
The PCM heating effect (during a warm to cold environmental transient) and the PCM
cooling effect (during a cold to warm transient) are the resulting differences in body heat loss to
the environment. This is not the amount of heat actually released or stored by the PCM in the

material. Some of this heat is lost to or gained from the environment. Therefore, the effect on
body heat loss measured in this study is the actual heating or cooling buffering effect of the
PCM that the wearer would experience.
RESULTS OF TRANSIENT MANIKIN TESTS
The difference in heat loss between the one layer PCM suit and the control suit without
PCM is graphed in Figure 3. The PCM suit produced an average heating effect of 6.5 W in the
first 15 minutes after the manikin was moved from a warm environment to a cold environment.
In other words, the manikin lost an average 6.5 W less heat during the first 15 minutes of
wearing the one layer PCM suit as compared to the control suit. When the manikin was moved
from the cold chamber to the warm one, the PCM suit produced an average cooling effect of 7.6
W. (See Table II.)
Thus, the heat released by one layer of phase change material next to the body produces a
small, temporary heating effect in cold environments. The heat absorbed by PCMs in one layer
of clothing produces a small, temporary cooling effect in warm environments. These effects were
found for one layer, full coverage body suits that fit close to the body.
The difference in heat loss between the two layer PCM suit and control suit is graphed in
Figure 4. The PCM suit produced an average heating effect of 13.2 W in the first 15 minutes of
the warm to cold transient. When the manikin was moved from the cold chamber to the warm
one, the PCM suit produced an average cooling effect of 11.0 W. (See Table II.) The effect of
the PCMs on body heat loss was greater in the two layer suits than in the one layer suits. This
result was expected because there was more PCM present in the two layer ensemble. In addition,
more of the PCM microcapsules were away from the body in the two layer suit so that they could
respond to changes in the environment. Therefore, the magnitude of the heating and cooling
effects associated with phase change materials in clothing increases as the number of PCM
garment layers increases.
The heating and cooling effects of the two layer suits containing only one layer of PCM
were less than the effects produced by the two layer PCM suit. There are less PCM

microcapsules in one layer of clothing (as compared to two layers) to go through the phase
change. In addition, there was a larger heating and cooling effect when the PCM layer was on the
outside than when it was on the inside, next to the body. (See Table II.) The layer next to the
body experiences smaller temperature changes in response to environmental transients. When the
PCM is next to the body, all of it may not reach the phase change temperature; some PCM may
stay in the liquid state. These layering differences may not be as great in clothing systems that
fit more loosely on the body and contain thicker air layers.
The heating and cooling effects of the suit with two layers of PCM on the top half of the
body (arms and torso) and two layers of control foam on the bottom half (hips and legs) were
less than the effects produced by the two layer PCM suit with full coverage. Thus, the heating
and cooling effects associated with phase change materials in clothing increase as the amount of
body coverage with PCM fabrics increases. Consequently, if a person wears only a jacket
containing PCM, the effect on body heat loss will be smaller than if he/she wears a jacket and
long pants containing PCM. In addition, it is apparently more effective to have one layer of
PCM on the outside of a tight-fitting, two layer ensemble (9.9 W heating effect) than to have two
layers of PCM on approximately half of the body surface (6.3 W heating effect). This result was
expected because the PCMs closest to the body in the arms and torso areas may not change
phase.
The PCM ski ensemble produced an average heating effect of 5.9 W in the first 15
minutes after the manikin was moved from a warm environment to a cold environment and a
cooling effect of 7.4 W when he was moved back to the warm chamber. The ski jacket and pants
contained one layer of fabric-backed foam and an outer shell fabric. The heating and cooling
effects associated with phase change materials in the ski garments were similar to the effects
produced by the tight-fitting, one layer suit (6.5 W and 7.6 W, respectively).
IMPLICATIONS OF THE PCM HEATING AND COOLING EFFECTS
In order to interpret the practical significance of the heating and cooling effects
measured, two calculations were performed to put these results into perspective. First, the

Q
m

(5)
impact on the difference in heat loss during the transient on body temperature was determined.
Second, the equivalent change in air temperature required to elicit the same change in heat loss
was calculated. Each calculation is described below.
The effect on body temperature was determined by first calculating the impact on body
heat storage:
where
Q = the energy storage (J)
q = the average heating or cooling effect calculated previously (W)
t = the time of the transient effect (900 seconds or 15 minutes)
The amount of energy storage was used to calculate the effect of the PCM on the body
temperature by:

where
)TB = overall body temperature change (EC)
c = heat capacitance of a human body (3.490 J/kg/K )
m = body mass (kg)
The two layer PCM experimental suit, which showed the highest heating effect, provided
an average heating effect of 13.2 W and a total of 11,880 J of energy storage in the body for 15
minutes compared to the control suit. It provided an average cooling effect of 11.0 W and a total
9,900 J of energy loss from the body for 15 minutes. (See Table II.)
The change in overall body temperature caused by the PCM was calculated using the
weight of an average man (78 kg). The two layer PCM suits which had the highest buffering
effect on manikin heat loss resulted in a 0.04EC increase in body temperature (body heating
effect) during the first 15 minutes of the warm to cold transient, and a 0.04EC decrease in body
temperature (body cooling effect) during the 15 minute cold to warm transient. These changes in

body temperature are minimal and indicate that the heating and cooling effects of phase change
materials in clothing may have little effect on the human thermal perception. However, PCMs
in clothing might have a temporary effect on local skin temperatures during environmental
transients [2, 8].
The change in the temperature of the environment required to elicit the same effect on
heat loss as the measured heating or cooling effect can be calculated by:

where
)TE = the required environment temperature change (C)
A = the skin surface area of the manikin (1.8 m2)
Rt = the total thermal resistance for the clothing ensemble (m@EC/W)
The resulting required environmental temperature changes are presented in Table III. For
a lightly clothed person, the threshold for environmental temperature perception resolution is
about 1C. As clothing insulation increases, the value increases accordingly. The temperatures
in Table III are probably on the borderline of perception for the levels of clothing insulation
worn.
Conclusions
The incorporation of micro-encapsulated phase change materials into fabric-backed
foams produced a small, temporary heating effect when garments made of the material were
worn in a transition from a warm environment (where the PCM has absorbed heat energy and is
in the liquid state) to a cold environment (where the PCM releases heat as it freezes). The PCM
garments also produced a small, temporary cooling effect in a similar transition from a cold
environment to a warm environment. The PCM heating and cooling effects did not extend
beyond approximately 15 minutes and changed the average body heat loss by 2-13 W for the first
15 minutes of the environmental transient -- depending on the combination of garments worn.
The magnitude of the effect was dependent upon the number of PCM garment layers, the
orientation of the PCM layer to the body, and the amount of body surface area covered by PCM

garments. The heating and cooling effects of phase change materials in the clothing evaluated in
this study are likely to have little effect on the temperature of the human body and on the
wearers perceptions of thermal comfort.
Further work should focus on the use of micro-encapsulated phase change materials in
work clothing where the wearer either moves back and forth between two very different
environments or intermittently touches hot and/or cold objects. In these applications, the thermal
buffering effect may be beneficial to the wearer and continue indefinitely.
Literature Cited
1. American Society for Testing and Materials, Annual Book of ASTM Standards -- Parts
7.01, 7.02, 8.02, 11.03, Conshohocken, PA: ASTM (1999).
2. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers. ASHRAE
handbook-1997 Fundamentals, Chapter 8. Atlanta: ASHRAE (1997).
3. Bryant, Y. G., & Colvin, D. P., Fibers with enhanced, reversible thermal energy storage
properties, Techtextil-Symposium, 1-8 (1992).
4. Cox, R., Synopsis of the new thermal regulating fiber outlast, Chemical Fibers
International 48, 475-479 (1998).
5. Pause, B. H., Investigations of the heat insulation of protective textiles with
microencapsulated PCM, Techtextil-Symposium, Paper No. 245, 1-9 (1994).
6. Pause, B. H., Development of heat and cold insulating membrane structures with phase
change material., Journal of Coated Fabrics 25 (7), 59-68 (1995).
7. Pause, B. H., Development of new cold protective clothing with phase change material,
In International Conference on Safety & Protective Fabrics 98, Baltimore, MD, 1998,
pp. 78-84.
8. Shim, H. The Use of Phase Change Materials in Clothing, Doctoral Dissertation, Kansas
State University, Manhattan, KS, 1999.

TABLE I. Physical properties and performance indexes of fabric-backed foam

with and without PCMs.
Physical property
Fabric thickness (mm)
Fabric weight (g/m2)

Foam with PCM

4.13

Foam without PCM

3.44

455.2

267.4

2924.9

2089.4

Oxygen index (Flammability)a

18.5

19.2

Fabric insulation, Rf
(EC@m2/W)
(clo)

0.120
0.774

0.111
0.714

Fabric evaporative resistance,

Re,f (kPa@m2/W)

0.0120

0.0096

Fabric stiffness (mg@cm)

Performance index
Insulation per unit thickness
(clo/mm)
Insulation per unit weight
(clo/g/m2)

Foam with PCM

Foam without PCM

0.187

0.208

0.002

0.003

The lower the index number, the higher the flammability.

TABLE II. Heating/cooling effects of clothing during the first 15 minutes of

environmental temperature transients.
Garments with PCM compared to
garments without PCM
One layer suit with PCM vs. no-PCM
control
Two layer suit with PCM vs. no-PCM
control
Two layer suit (inner layer with PCM,
outer layer without PCM) vs. two layer
suit without PCM
Two layer suit (outer layer with PCM,
inner layer without PCM) vs. two layer
suit without PCM
Two layer suit with PCM on top 39% of
body and without PCM on bottom 42% of
body vs. two layer suit without PCM
PCM ski ensemble vs. ski ensemble
without PCM

Average heating effect Total energy gain for Average cooling effect To
during warm to cold 15 minutes during during cold to warm 1
transient (W)
warm to cold transient
transient (W)
col
(J)
6.5
5,850
7.6
13.2

11,880

11.0

4.5

4,050

2.0

9.9

8,910

7.1

6.3

5,670

3.4

5.9

5,310

7.4

TABLE III. Equivalent environmental temperature change.a

Clothing

Warm to cool

Cool to warm

1 Layer suit

0.9C

1.0C

2 Layer suit

2.4C

2.0C

Ski ensemble

1.1C

1.4C

The change in environmental temperature required to elicit the same change in body heat loss
that resulted from the phase change effect.

Figure Captions

FIGURE 1. Warm to cold: average heat loss from the manikin wearing the two layer suits with
PCM, with PCM on top half of body, and no-PCM control.

FIGURE 2. Cold to warm: average heat loss from the manikin wearing the two layer suits with
PCM, with PCM on top half of body, and no-PCM control.

FIGURE 3. Difference in heat loss from the manikin wearing the one layer suits with PCM and
no-PCM control.

FIGURE 4. Difference in heat loss from the manikin wearing the two layer suits with PCM and
no-PCM control.