Comparative Evaluation of Test Methods for Cut Resistance of Protective Gloves According to Polish Standards
Research and development
Authors:
- Irzmańska Emilia
Department of Personal Protective Equipment, Central Institute for Labour Protection - National Research Institute (CIOP-PIB), Łódź, Poland - Stefko Agnieszka (j/w)
Full text | Abstract: This paper concerns a comparative evaluation of methods for testing the cut resistance of gloves protecting against mechanical injuries according to PN-EN 388:2006 and PN-EN ISO 13997:2003 standards. The results of preliminary tests indicated that the method applied currently in accordance with the former standard mentioned above is problematic and may yield erroneous results for gloves made of yarns highly resistant to cuts. Therefore the main aim of the study was to perform tests according to both standards and to conclude basis thereon whether the application of the method used for evaluation of protective clothing consistent with PN-EN ISO 13997:2003 would also be possible for testing protective gloves. The other aim of this study was to determine the performance levels for results obtained for gloves according to the test method intended for protective clothing. Cut resistance tests were carried out for twelve different materials obtained from protective gloves and clothing (commercially available) made of fabrics of cut-resistant, high-strength yarns. On the basis of the tests carried out, it was confirmed that the method for testing in accordance with PN-EN 388:2006 is insufficient to assess the key protective parameter, i.e. the cut resistance. The alternative testing method applicable to protective clothing and gloves highly resistant to cuts is that according to PN-EN ISO 13997:2003. |
Tags:
protective gloves, cut-resistant, high-strength yarns, standardised test methods.
Citation:
Irzmańska E, Stefko A. Comparative Evaluation of Test Methods for Cut Resistance of Protective Gloves According to Polish Standards. FIBRES & TEXTILES in Eastern Europe 2012; 20, 5(94): 99-103.
Published in issue no 5 (94) / 2012, pages 99–103.