A Commparative Study of Two Experimental Pneumatic Anti-G Suits and the Standard USAF G4-A Anti-G Suit
This citation is provided as a resource for researchers, but Contrails cannot provide a full-text download
U.S. government employees, Military/Department of Defense employees, and U.S. government contractors and sub-contractors may be eligible to register with the Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC), where this report and others like it may be available
Report Number: WADC TR 52-317
Author(s): Sieker, Herbert O., Martin, Ernest E.
Corporate Author(s): Aero Medical Laboratory
Laboratory: Aero Medical Laboratory
Date of Publication: 1953-02
Pages: 27
DoD Task:
Identifier: AD0012716
AD Number: 12716
Abstract:
Two new types of pneumatic anti-g suits have been examined which apply pressure to a greater portion of the lower part of the body than the standard C-4A suit. The two suits consist of (1) complete coverage trousers composed of a connected system of circumferential bladders and (2) full pressure trousers. These two types of anti-g suits provide 0.7 to 0.9 g more protection against acceleration than the standard G-4A anti-g suit which afforded 1.8 g protection. A comparative study of the effect of the three types of protection on arterial pressure, venous pressure and vertical heart-to-head distance was undertaken on human subjects. During acceleration the inflation of the two experimental suits maintained mean arterial pressure at eye level and venous pressure at heart level higher than did the C-4A suit under the same conditions. The shortening of the heart-to-head distance was not significantly different with the three types of protection. It is believed that greater protection is afforded by the experimental anti-g suits because they apply greater pressure evenly to a larger portion of the lower part of the body than the G-4A suit is able to do. By this means they increase peripheral arterial resistance and venous return to the heart more effectively than the G-4A anti-g suit. The two experimental suits have been shown to be an effective and comfortable type of protection against acceleration. Within the limits of blackout or comfort tolerance of the subject, these suits have been demonstrated to be safe for human use. Moreover, they may be incorporated into a combination altitude, anti-g and exposure suit. These new anti-g suits have the disadvantage of being bulky, poorly ventilated and in the case of the full pressure suit, difficult to don. It is concluded that further study, testing, modification and development of these anti-g suits should continue.
Author(s): Sieker, Herbert O., Martin, Ernest E.
Corporate Author(s): Aero Medical Laboratory
Laboratory: Aero Medical Laboratory
Date of Publication: 1953-02
Pages: 27
DoD Task:
Identifier: AD0012716
AD Number: 12716
Abstract:
Two new types of pneumatic anti-g suits have been examined which apply pressure to a greater portion of the lower part of the body than the standard C-4A suit. The two suits consist of (1) complete coverage trousers composed of a connected system of circumferential bladders and (2) full pressure trousers. These two types of anti-g suits provide 0.7 to 0.9 g more protection against acceleration than the standard G-4A anti-g suit which afforded 1.8 g protection. A comparative study of the effect of the three types of protection on arterial pressure, venous pressure and vertical heart-to-head distance was undertaken on human subjects. During acceleration the inflation of the two experimental suits maintained mean arterial pressure at eye level and venous pressure at heart level higher than did the C-4A suit under the same conditions. The shortening of the heart-to-head distance was not significantly different with the three types of protection. It is believed that greater protection is afforded by the experimental anti-g suits because they apply greater pressure evenly to a larger portion of the lower part of the body than the G-4A suit is able to do. By this means they increase peripheral arterial resistance and venous return to the heart more effectively than the G-4A anti-g suit. The two experimental suits have been shown to be an effective and comfortable type of protection against acceleration. Within the limits of blackout or comfort tolerance of the subject, these suits have been demonstrated to be safe for human use. Moreover, they may be incorporated into a combination altitude, anti-g and exposure suit. These new anti-g suits have the disadvantage of being bulky, poorly ventilated and in the case of the full pressure suit, difficult to don. It is concluded that further study, testing, modification and development of these anti-g suits should continue.