Thermal Manikin testing system

In order to ensure that the power consumption of the standard panels did not exceed 180 kW, we conducted additional computer simulations. The calculations indicated that by modifying the structural design, it was possible to increase the efficiency of each panel.

The modification in the structural design involved the integration of reflectors, addressing two key issues: 1) Overheating of the thermal panel lamps due to scattered rays hitting adjacent bulbs; 2) A significant portion of thermal energy being directed non-perpendicularly to the emission plane and away from the thermal manikin.

After incorporating reflectors, the thermal panel exhibited the following characteristics: Efficiency (Coefficient of Performance) – 80% (a 30% increase); the distance from the panel at which a value of 40 kW/m2 was achieved – 15 cm. This solution resolved the energy consumption issue, as only 2 panels were now sufficient for testing the mannequin, instead of the initially required 3.

Implementing reflectors around the lamps of the thermal panels increased efficiency by 30%. Energy consumption was reduced by 1.5 times, as the enhanced efficiency of individual panels meant that only two units were required to achieve the necessary temperature for heating the space and manikin.

To implement the manikin’s movement mechanism, we needed to consider the room dimensions, the influence of high-temperature open flame, and ventilation ducts placement. We opted to develop a crane-beam system as existing solutions occupied significant space, impeding human passage and hindering the installation of room ventilation.

With a room height of 3 meters, the crane-beam was designed to allow unrestricted movement for an adult at full height.

However, the ventilation issue persisted, as our crane-beam design still couldn't accommodate the ventilation structure. Subsequently, we relocated the air ducts outside, while air intake was maintained inside the facility.

In addition to longitudinal movement, the manikin was to descend, ascend, and rotate 180° around its axis.

To achieve the required kinematics for the thermal manikin, we conducted calculations for moment of inertia and moment of friction. For rotation around its own axis, we employed a single-stage worm gear motor-reducer, chosen for its minimal inertial moment to avoid significant additional weight on the manikin. This approach was crucial to facilitate the selection of an actuator for vertical movement. The relatively low mass of the chosen rotation drive allowed us to use commercially available linear rod actuators with a piston speed of 10 mm per second.