A comparison of globe, wet and dry temperature and humidity measuring devices available for heat stress assessment

Various controlled and ambient tests were undertaken to evaluate the performance of a variety of digital heat stress monitors, psychrometers and simpler temperature/relative humidity data loggers that measure, or determine, such parameters as: dry-bulb, natural wet-bulb, psychrometric wet-bulb and globe temperatures. In this comparison, funded by the Deep Mining Research Consortium, it has been found that all the instruments can competently measure dry-bulb temperature but the accuracy of other sensors could introduce significant uncertainty. For example the quality of relative humidity sensors and failure to correct for the barometric pressure difference in deep mines, directly impacts upon the calculation of psychrometric wet-bulb. The comparison has shown that the response of dry-bulb and globe temperature sensors can vary widely under different radiant heat conditions; however this would be negligible in most mines. Of more concern is the differing performance of the natural-wet bulb sensors especially at low relative humidity and low air velocity. Furthermore, from these tests and the currently available theory it was not possible to determine if any of the natural-wet bulb instruments measured that value correctly or validate any relationship between psychrometric and natural wet-bulb temperature at low air speeds where their difference is greatest. Consequently the uninformed use of some of the commercially available environmental heat stress monitors or derivations from other instruments could provide erroneous results affecting the work load category that can be accommodated or the rest ratio regime required.