TECHNICAL REPORT

NATICK/TR-22/011

AD _____________

QMAX RELATIONSHIP TO PERCEIVED COMFORT AS

MEASURED BY THE CALM SCALE

by
Herbert J. Barndt
and
John D. Pierce, Jr.

Laboratory for Engineered Human Protection

Philadelphia University
Philadelphia, PA 19144-5497

January 2022

Final Report
May 1, 2005 – May 31, 2008

Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited

Prepared for
U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Soldier Center
Natick, Massachusetts 01760-5020
 Form Approved
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and
maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden to Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports (0704-0188), 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway,
Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of
information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.
PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.
1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) 2. REPORT TYPE 3. DATES COVERED (From - To)
26-01-2022 Final May 1, 2005 - May 31, 2008
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. CONTRACT NUMBER

QMAX RELATIONSHIP TO PERCEIVED COMFORT AS W911QY-04-1-0001

MEASURED BY THE CALM SCALE 5b. GRANT NUMBER

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER

6. AUTHOR(S) 5d. PROJECT NUMBER

Herbert J. Barndt and John D. Pierce, Jr.

5e. TASK NUMBER

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT

Laboratory for Engineered Human Protection NUMBER
Philadelphia University
School House Lane and Henry Avenue PHILA-LEHP-ME-TR-08-03
Philadelphia, PA 19144-5497
9. SPONSORING / MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S ACRONYM(S)
U.S. Army Combat Capabilities Development Command Soldier Center DEVCOM SC
ATTN: RDNS-SES (C. Winterhalter) 11. SPONSOR/MONITOR’S REPORT NUMBER(S)
10 General Greene Avenue NATICK/TR-22/011
Natick, MA 01760-5020
12. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT
Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.
13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES
© 2008 Laboratory for Engineered Human Protection, Philadelphia University.
14. ABSTRACT
This investigation compares the evaluation of perceived fabric comfort using the Comfort Affective Labeled Magnitude
(CALM) scale and the objectively measured instantaneous heat flow (Qmax) as measured using the KES-F7 Thermolabo
II. A set of 36 fabrics was selected and evaluated using the two methods. The results indicated a high degree of
agreement between the results of the two methods. This agreement is particularly significant because CALM measures
principally tactile factors and, in contrast, Qmax measures thermal transfer.
15. SUBJECT TERMS
KES COMFORT THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY
CALM THERMAL INSTANTANEOUS HEAT FLOW
KES-F7 KAWABATA LABELED MAGNITUDE SCALE
q MAX HEAT TRANSFER COMFORT AFFECTIVE LABELED MAGNITUDE SCALE
QMAX THERMOLABO II KAWABATA EVALUATION SYSTEM FOR FABRICS(KES-F)
FABRICS THERMAL TRANSFER KES F(KAWABATA EVALUATION SYSTEM FOR FABRICS)
TACTILE TEXTILE PROPERTIES
TESTING TEST AND EVALUATION
TEXTILES KES INSTRUMENTATION
16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION OF 18. NUMBER 19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON
a. REPORT b. ABSTRACT c. THIS PAGE ABSTRACT OF PAGES Carole Winterhalter
U U U SAR 24 19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (include area code)
(508) 206 3936
Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8-98)
Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18
This page is intentionally blank.
PHILA-LEHP-ME-TR-08-03

QMAX RELATIONSHIP TO PERCEIVED

COMFORT AS MEASURED BY THE CALM
SCALE
Prepared for
U.S. ARMY NATICK SOLDIER RESEARCH,
DEVELOPMENT & ENGINEERING CENTER
Natick, Massachusetts, USA 01760-5020

Under W911QY-04-1-0001

For the Period

May 1, 2005 to May 31, 2008

Submitted by
Herbert J. Barndt and John D. Pierce, Jr.

LABORATORY FOR ENGINEERED

HUMAN PROTECTION
Philadelphia University
Philadelphia, PA, USA 19144-5497
 Laboratory for Engineered Human Protection
Philadelphia University
School House Lane and Henry Avenues
Philadelphia, PA, USA 19144-5497

phone: 215.951.5947

© 2008 Laboratory for Engineered Human Protection, Philadelphia

University

ii
Table of Contents
List of Figures ........................................................................................................ vi
List of Tables ......................................................................................................... vi
Preface..................................................................................................................... 1
Introduction ............................................................................................................. 2
Purpose and Scope .............................................................................................. 2
Background ......................................................................................................... 3
Methods and Procedures ......................................................................................... 4
CALM Testing .................................................................................................... 4
Qmax Measurement ............................................................................................ 5
Results and Discussion ........................................................................................... 6
Conclusions ............................................................................................................. 9
Recommendations ................................................................................................. 10
References ............................................................................................................. 11
Appendix A – Comfort Affective Labeled Magnitude (CALM) Scale
Used for the Comfort Assessment of Fabrics in the Present Study ................ 13

v
List of Figures
Figure 1. Graph of CALM and Qmax Values. Series 1 is Qmax.
Series 2 is CALM.................................................................................... 8

List of Tables
Table 1. Fabrics’ CALM and Qmax Data (Mean and Scaled) ............................... 7

vi
Preface
This investigation compares the evaluation of perceived fabric comfort
using the Comfort Affective Labeled Magnitude (CALM) scale and
the objectively measured instantaneous heat flow (Qmax) as measured
using the KES-F7 Thermolabo II.

Qmax measures the instantaneous heat transfer when the surface of the
fabric is contacted by a sensor. This measurement is related to the
warm/cool feeling an individual would sense when contacting a fabric
surface and, if found comparable to CALM determinations, could
greatly reduce the time and effort required to collect fabric comfort
data and eliminate unsuitable candidate fabrics.

A set of 36 fabrics was selected and evaluated using the CALM scale
and Qmax measurement. The study was limited to flat woven and
single knit fabrics. Since Qmax is influenced by fabric geometry,
heavily textured fabrics were not evaluated using this method.

This research was funded by the Department of Defense University

Research Initiative. The grant award number was W911QY-04-1-
0001. The funding agency was NSRDEC; the program supported was
Warrior Systems Technologies.

1
Introduction
This research was funded by the Department of Defense University
Research Initiative. The grant award number was W911QY-04-1-
0001. The funding agency was NSRDEC; the program supported was
Warrior Systems Technologies.

Purpose and Scope

A long-term objective for the Laboratory for Engineered Human
Protection is to research the relationships between comfort, protection,
and performance to determine which unique combinations of these
factors are optimal for military and civilian first-responder protective
garments. As part of this multidisciplinary approach to designing
military garments, one essential assessment is determining perceived
comfort, the human emotional response that accompanies the
perception of the tactile and thermal environment. Existing research
has made clear the influence of perceived comfort on quality
perception (Holbrook 1983), garment acceptance (Abraham-Murali
and Littrell 1995), and performance (Bell, Cardello, and Schutz 2003).

This investigation compares the evaluation of perceived fabric comfort

using the Comfort Affective Labeled Magnitude (CALM) scale and
the objectively measured instantaneous heat flow (Qmax) as measured
using the KES-F7 Thermolabo II.

Qmax measures the instantaneous heat transfer when the surface of the
fabric is contacted by a sensor. This measurement is related to the
warm/cool feeling an individual would sense when contacting a fabric
surface and, if found comparable to CALM determinations, could
greatly reduce the time and effort required to collect fabric comfort
data and eliminate unsuitable candidate fabrics.

A set of 36 fabrics was selected and evaluated using the CALM scale
and Qmax measurement. The study was limited to flat woven and
single knit fabrics. Since Qmax is influenced by fabric geometry,
heavily textured fabrics were not evaluated using this method.

Following this introduction, this report contains:

• a description of the methods and procedures

• a presentation of the results and a discussion of those results

2
 • conclusions drawn from the results

• recommendations for further study

• a list of works cited

• an appendix illustrating the CALM scale

Background
The perception of comfort realized when handling a fabric is a
subjective tactile sensation. Researchers at the U.S. Army Natick
Soldier Research, Development & Engineering Center (Natick)
developed a labeled magnitude scale of measurement for the
assessment of fabric comfort. This scale, the Comfort Affective
Labeled Magnitude (CALM) scale, is a reliable, easy-to-use scale for
quantifying the human experience of tactile comfort. The scale is a
200-point standardized labeled magnitude scale, 100 mm in length and
bounded by the labels “Greatest Imaginable Discomfort” and Greatest
Imaginable Comfort” (see Appendix A).

Participants indicate their rating of comfort by placing a mark across

the vertical line scale at the point corresponding to their rating. The
measurement from the bottom of the scale to the point marked by the
participant is the numeric estimate for comfort. The CALM scale was
used in a series of psychophysical studies to provide reliable comfort
ratings of a variety of military fabrics (Cardello, Schutz, and
Winterhalter 2002; Bell, Cardello, and Schutz 2003; Cardello, Schutz,
and Winterhalter 2003; Schutz, Cardello, and Winterhalter 2005). The
resulting comfort data were then compared to Kawabata physical
measurements and sensory handfeel properties of the same fabrics to
obtain a predictive relationship among these measured variables (e.g.,
Cardello, Schutz, Winterhalter 2002). Results showed that the
Kawabata and sensory measurements were strong predictors of the
comfort responses from panelists, indicating that the comfort of a
garment could be predicted by its physical and sensory characteristics.

These studies also demonstrated the feasibility and practicality of the

CALM scale for providing accurate, reliable estimates of perceived
tactile comfort of fabrics. This technique, while highly effective,
requires extensive resources in manpower and time. Qmax objectively
measures the instantaneous heat transfer as the instrument contacts the
fabric surface.

3
Methods and Procedures
Note: Except for values for which no unit of measure is relevant, SI
units of measure are used in this section.

CALM Testing
The CALM testing methodology is briefly summarized here. A full
technical description of the methodology can be found in a companion
technical report, “Further Evaluation of the Reliability and Validity of
the CALM Scale for Assessing the Tactile Comfort of Fabrics” (Pierce
2008).

The CALM scale was used to provide evaluations of perceived

comfort of 50 test fabrics. A subset of 36 was considered suitable for
this CALM/Qmax comparison. (The other fabrics were excluded
because their construction made them less suitable for reliable Qmax
measurement.)

These fabrics were identified by the textile researchers at the LEHP

Materials Evaluation Laboratory and selected to provide a broad range
of fabrics with different sensory characteristics. Fabrics were tested in
5 different testing sets ranging from 9 to 15 different fabrics (4 of the
fabrics were tested with 11 additional fabrics not included in the
present study). Each set was evaluated by 50 participants in individual
testing sessions consisting of 2 to 12 participants.

Participants were recruited from faculty, staff, and students of the

Philadelphia University community and were “naïve” to the purpose;
they were not trained in textile technologies or experienced in the
garment industry. All respondents were pre-screened for any hand
disorders or medical conditions that might affect tactile sensitivity. All
participants were treated in accordance with the American
Psychological Association’s Code of Ethical Conduct for researchers
(APA 2002).

For each sequence, the textile laboratory team assumed primary

responsibility for the care and preparation of the fabric samples. All
samples were cut into testing swatches and coded with a three-digit
code in the upper right corner of the fabric.

Samples and an accompanying CALM data sheet were placed

individually in manila testing folders that were also marked with the
three-character identification code. A total of 20 sets of samples for

4
 each fabric set were created using this procedure and were used for
testing.

Upon arrival at the testing facility, participants were assigned to

specific seats in the testing room, with the provision that no two
participants sit close enough to allow for possible sharing of
information. The researchers provided introductory comments
regarding the study. Participants read and signed the consent form,
then washed their hands with alcohol gel hand sanitizer prior to
testing.

Participants in a group were instructed on the proper use of the CALM

scale. They were then given the first test folder and asked to handle the
fabric ad libitum on the testing side only before indicating the degree
of comfort on the enclosed CALM scale.

After the assessment was completed, the first folder was removed and
the second one was given to the participant. Each subsequent testing
folder was presented individually until all fabrics in the set had been
rated. The order of presentation of fabric samples was determined in
advance through randomization procedures and differed for each
participant. Upon the completion of the study, the researcher thanked
the participants for their time and explained the general purpose of the
study.

Qmax Measurement
Qmax is the measurement of instantaneous heat transfer from the
surface of a fabric when contacted by a measuring device. The
contacting surface (Qmax probe) is heated to 10 °C above the
temperature of the contacted surface (usually 20 °C), and the
instantaneous heat flow is measured. The measurement simulates the
sensation a human evaluator would notice when first touching a
surface. The thermal conductivity of the contacted surface and the
surface geometry determine the instantaneous heat loss to the
contacting surface. High rate of heat loss indicates a cool feeling and
lower heat loss indicates a warm feeling.

The contacting device consists of a thin 3 cm x 3 cm copper plate with

a sensitive temperature-measuring device.

The plate and sensor are housed in an insulated box (T–box) with a
total mass of 90 g. This results in a contacting pressure of 10 g/cm sq.
The plate and sensor are heated to a temperature that corresponds to 10

5
 °C above ambient (usually 20 °C). This is also the temperature (20 °C)
of the surface being evaluated. The T-box is placed on a heated surface
(BT-box), a guarded hot plate, and allowed to stabilize at a
temperature 10 °C above ambient. The temperature of the BT-box is
controlled by setting the temperature adjustment on the instrument.
The heated T-box is then placed on the surface to be measured and the
heat loss during the first 0.2 sec is recorded. Qmax is expressed in
Joules per square centimeter per second (J/cm sq/sec).

Qmax measurements were conducted in a conditioned laboratory (65%

relative humidity and 20 °C) following the instructions provided by
the manufacturer of the KES-F7 Thermolabo II. A minimum of five
determinations per fabric were collected. Data from the two methods
were then compared to determine if there was any agreement.

Results and Discussion

To compare the two sets of measurements (CALM and Qmax), it was
necessary to find a scale that would allow for direct comparison of the
data points. The CALM data was rescaled to a range of 1–5, a scale
frequently used to describe evaluations of perceived fabric
characteristics. In this scale (1–5), a value of 1 indicates the least
desirable outcome and a value of 5 indicates the most desirable
outcome.

The Qmax measurements, which ranged from 0.1–0.3 J/cm sq/sec

were also scaled to a range of 1–5. In this rescale, 1 is the coolest and
5 indicates the warmest.

The ambient conditions under which the Qmax measurements and

CALM assessments were made were very similar. As stated
previously, Qmax measures the heat loss when a surface heated to 10
°C above ambient (usually 20 °C) comes into contact with a fabric
surface at ambient. CALM testing was conducted at approximately 20
°C, and the human evaluators’ skin temperatures were 10 to 15 °C
above the temperature used in the evaluation room. Under these
conditions it was reasonable to assume that a "warmer" fabric would
have a more "pleasant" feeling. Hence warmest fabrics, as measured
by Qmax were selected as the highest rated when compared to the
CALM ratings. 1 0F

1 If the CALM evaluations were conducted at a higher ambient temperature, it is possible that
fabrics rated as "cooler" by Qmax might have a higher CALM rating. This would be an interesting
subject of further study.

6
 Table 1 lists the fabrics evaluated and the results for CALM and
Qmax. CALM measurements are based on a minimum of fifty
determinations for each fabric. Qmax results are based on at least five
determinations for each fabric. Figure 1 shows the relationship
between the two data sets.

Correlation analysis resulted in an r=0.63.

The data sets generated by very different methods, perceived vs.

objective, show solid agreement. This seems to indicate that the
properties measured with Qmax are strongly related to the initial
sensations detected by an evaluator handling a fabric. Because CALM
assessments are the result of a combination of sensations including,
touch, appearance, manual manipulation, and temperature, it is
interesting that temperature, as measured by Qmax, has a relatively
high agreement with the complex CALM assessment

Table 1. Fabrics’ CALM and Qmax Data (Mean and Scaled)

Fabric Fabric Qmax Qmax CALM CALM
ID Type Mean Scaled Mean Scaled
31A Plain 0.2325 2.51 -19.2 2.02
43W Rip-stop 0.2125 2.81 -18.0 2.05
96K Plain 0.25 2.25 -17.6 2.06
62L Rip-stop 0.285 1.73 -17.2 2.07
55U Twill 0.272 1.92 -17.2 2.07
56S Rip-stop 0.2635 2.05 -12.4 2.19
11P Rip-stop 0.268 1.98 -9.2 2.27
98H Rip-stop 0.167 3.50 -9.2 2.27
94D Rip-stop 0.271 1.94 -8.4 2.29
51U Satin 0.2845 1.73 -4.4 2.39
14N Twill 0.2075 2.89 -6.4 2.34
59Q Rip-stop 0.277 1.85 0.4 2.51
10L Rip-stop 0.2685 1.97 0.4 2.51
73C Plain 0.2875 1.69 2.8 2.57
17C Plain 0.203 2.96 2.8 2.57
79X Twill 0.2785 1.82 7.2 2.68
13P Plain 0.157 3.65 9.2 2.73
96T Twill 0.27 1.95 10.0 2.75
16C Rip-stop 0.2455 2.32 12.4 2.81
10R Rip-stop 0.203 2.96 14.8 2.87
34G Plain 0.1825 3.26 21.6 3.04
53N Plain 0.2225 2.66 23.2 3.08
98N Twill 0.206 2.91 23.2 3.08

7
 Fabric Fabric Qmax Qmax CALM CALM
ID Type Mean Scaled Mean Scaled
55L Twill 0.2495 2.26 26.4 3.16
19N Plain 0.151 3.74 28.8 3.22
14F Twill 0.255 2.18 31.6 3.29
11A Plain 0.2135 2.80 32.8 3.32
12T Twill 0.2045 2.93 32.8 3.32
11S Plain 0.2235 2.65 33.2 3.33
11J Knit 0.1605 3.59 45.6 3.64
15B Oxford 0.2085 2.87 47.2 3.68
14V Plain 0.1715 3.43 48.0 3.70
21K Knit 0.147 3.80 49.2 3.73
45X Knit 0.1465 3.80 49.2 3.73
65C Knit 0.199 3.02 52.8 3.82
22J Knit 0.146 3.81 80.8 4.52

CALM vs Q-Max

4.5

3.5

Series1
2.5
Series2

1.5

0.5

0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45
Fabrics

Figure 1. Graph of CALM and Qmax Values. Series 1 is Qmax. Series 2 is

CALM.

8
Conclusions
For flat woven and single knit fabrics, using the fairly rapid Qmax
measurement can complement use of the CALM scale to provide a
more complete picture of the characteristics of fabrics.

The human evaluator will never be replaced by technology; however,

the Qmax measurements could be used to eliminate unlikely candidate
fabrics and reduce the expenditure of resources required by the CALM
method.

9
Recommendations
It is recommended that other physical measurements of fabrics be
examined for their correlation with the results of CALM assessment
and that Kawabata Evaluation System mechanical parameters be
combined with Qmax to examine their correlation with CALM
assessments.

Additional CALM testing should be conducted at higher ambient

temperatures to determine if fabrics rated as “cool” by Qmax are
preferred by CALM evaluators under those conditions.

It is further recommended that perceived comfort be considered as an

important adjunct to objective measures of fabric construction.

10
References
Abraham-Murali, Liza and Mary Ann M.A. Littrell. “Consumers’
Conceptualization of Apparel Attributes.” Clothing and Textiles
Research Journal 13.2 (1995): 65–74.

American Psychological Association, “Ethical Principles of

Psychologists and Code of Conduct.” American Psychologist 57
(2002): 1060–1073.

Bell, Rick, Armand.V. Cardello, and Howard G. Schutz, “Relations

Among Comfort of Fabrics, Ratings of Comfort, and Visual
Vigilance.” Perceptual and Motor Skills 97.1 (2003): 57–67.

Cardello, Armand. V., Howard. G. Schutz, and Carole Winterhalter.

“Development and Application of New Psychophysical Methods for
the Characterization of the Handfeel and Comfort Properties of
Military Clothing Fabrics.” Technical Report, NATICK/TR-02/022.
Natick, MA: U.S. Army Solder and Biological Chemical Command
Soldier Systems Center (2002).

Cardello, Armand V., Howard G. Schutz, and Carole Winterhalter.

“Predicting the Handle and Comfort of Military Clothing Fabrics from
Sensory and Instrumental Data: Development and Application of New
Psychophysical Methods.” Textile Research Journal 73.3 (2003): 221–
237.

Holbrook, Morris. “On the Importance of Using Real Products in

Research on Merchandising Strategy.” Journal of Retailing 59.1
(1983): 4–20.

Pierce, John D., Jr. “Further Evaluation of the Reliability and Validity
of the CALM Scale for Assessing the Tactile Comfort of Fabrics.”
Technical Report, PHILA-LEHP-BP-TR-08-01. Philadelphia, PA:
Philadelphia University Laboratory for Engineered Human Protection
(2008).

Schutz, Howard. G., Armand. V. Cardello, and Carole Winterhalter.

“Perceptions of Fiber and Fabric Uses and the Factors Contributing to
Military Clothing Comfort and Satisfaction.” Textile Research Journal
75 (2005): 223–32.

11
 This page is intentionally blank.

12
Appendix A – Comfort Affective Labeled Magnitude
(CALM) Scale Used for the Comfort Assessment of
Fabrics in the Present Study

Figure A1. CALM Scale Used for This Study (not shown actual size).

13
 This page is intentionally blank.

14