Understanding Cut Resistance Levels & Applications

UNDERSTANDING Cut Resistance Levels Croated and writton by Superior Glove Works Ltd. 4, SUPERIOR LOVE WOR Engineered hand protection for every industry OSHA According to a recent Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) study, 70.9% of arm and hand injuries could have been prevented with personal protective equipment (PPE), specifically safety gloves. Workplace Hand Injury: Figures Cut-Resistance Statistics: Getting a Perspective. The first chart illustrates, in 23.2% HandsWrist - 23.2% percentage tems, the incidence of cut injury to workers in the U.S. for the year 2006 - relative to other types of non-fatal injury. The second chart illustrates (also Head - 7% Neck - 1.5% Lower - 22.2% Trunk - 34% for the U.S. in 2006) the Other -12.1% percentage of injury that occurs to the hands and fingers in the workplace - relative to other body parts. Both charts utilize only lost-time injury statistics. 12.4% Cuts/punctures - 12.4% Fractures - 10.29% Burns(thermal, chemical) - 2.7% Sprains and strains - 51.1% Other - 7% When looking at the percentages, it is important to consider that not all injuries are preventable through the use of PPE, such as back injuries. Hand and finger cut injuries, however, are the most preventable. Cut-Resistant Test Methods Schematic drawing of TDM method Both the ASTM F1790 '05 and ISO 13997 standard describe the same test methods for cut resistance: the TDM and the updated CPP test, while the ASTM F1790'97 only describes the old CPP test for measuring cut performance. From a principle point of view, the functionality of both the CPP and TDM method are identical. Simply said, both methods measure the amount of pressure one can apply to a razor blade, while moving the blade over the fabric without cutting through the fabric for at least 0.8 inch (20 mm). CPP/TDM indicates how much force/load is needed to slash/cut through a fabric. ASTM ANSI (North American) Variable load (gr /N) Performance Weight (in grams) needed to cut through with 1 inch (25mm) of blade travel Level < 199 200 - 499 500 - 999 Linear movement 3 1000 -1499 1500 - 3499 > 3500 4 Glove sample Conductive strip to detect cut through Schematic drawing of Couptest method The EN388 standard describes the Couptest method for cut resistance, which is based on a totally different principle than the CPP/TDM method. In the Couptest, a circular blade is moving back and forth across the sample under a fixed load of 5N/500 gr, while rotating in the opposite direction of the linear movement. Couptest indicates how many repetitive cuts on the same position are needed to cut through. Fixed load of 500 gr / 5N EN 388 (Europe) Performance Level Average Cut Index (10 measurements) to linear movoment <1.2 1.2-2.4 2.5 - 4.9 5.0 - 9.9 Linear movement 2 (back and forth) 10.0 - 19.9 Glovo samplo > 20 Abrasion Conductive strip to detect cut through Blade Cut Tear - Puncture ASTM and CE Which level do I choose*? 5, You can handle the toughest cut hazards You can handle sheet metal, metal stampings, metal fabrication 3 You can handle glass, metal fabrication You can handle sharp parts, masonry, forestry hazards, construction You can handle small splinters, paper cuts, 1, automotive maintenance, parts assembly *These recommendations are of a general nature and are not specific to everyone's needs. Always ensure your selected glove complies with the mandated safety standard recommended for your application. Cut Resistance Different materials inherently offer varying levels of cut resistance. This diagram illustrates the level of cut resistance for each material on an escalating scale. Metal Mesh Engineered Yarns (Kevlar Steel, Dyneema Fiberglass) High performance materials (Dyneema", Kevlar") Synthetics (Polyester, Nylon) Cotton Leather Latex "Tost method comparison information supplied by Giovanni Honssen, DSM Dynooma SUPERIOR superiorglove.com GLOVE WORKS LTD. Engineered hand protection for every industry