A Selection Based on ANSI/ISEA Standard 138
Selecting Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for impact protection has historically been a challenge for safety professionals. For years, the industry lacked a unified standard for quantifying the performance of back-of-hand protection.
This lack of a "solid foundation" forced safety managers to base their decisions on manufacturer marketing or subjective testing. Even today, many distributors offer gloves without valid technical support, exposing organizations to unnecessary risks and costs.
The ANSI/ISEA 138 standard was established precisely to fill this critical gap. It provides an objective testing method and a clear performance scale, enabling, for the first time, truly informed product selection.
This guide focuses on how to use this standard to support a technical decision and defend the investment in security.
From Subjectivity to Technical Criteria: The Value of the Standard
The purpose of the ANSI/ISEA 138 standard is to replace ambiguity with data. Its value to the security professional lies in two key components:
- Comprehensive Testing: Unlike other standards, ANSI 138 requires impact testing not only on the knuckles , but also on the full length of the fingers and thumb , recognizing that these are areas of high vulnerability.
- Third-Party Verification: The standard requires that all classification tests be performed by an accredited laboratory (ISO/IEC 17025). This eliminates subjective performance claims and ensures that all certified products are measured against the same criteria.
Analysis of the 3 ANSI Performance Levels
The standard classifies performance based on the force transferred to the hand during a controlled impact of 5.0 Joules.
The key metric is transmitted force , measured in kilonewtons (kN). On this scale, a lower value indicates greater protection , as it means the glove absorbed and dissipated more of the impact's energy.
Level 1: Protection for Incidental Risks
- Transmitted Force: ≤ 9 Kilonewtons (kN)
- Performance: (Approx. 55% force absorption).
- Selection Criteria: Suitable for environments where the risk of impact is low or incidental. The design priority typically balances basic protection with high dexterity for tasks such as assembly, light mechanics, or logistics.
Level 2: Protection for Constant Risks
- Transmitted Force: ≤ 6.5 Kilonewtons (kN)
- Performance: (Approx. 67.5% force absorption).
- Selection Criteria: This is the performance standard for heavy industry. It is designed for tasks where impacts are a constant and expected risk. It is the common specification in Oil & Gas , mining, and heavy construction.
Level 3: Protection for Extreme Risks
- Transmitted Force: ≤ 5 Kilonewtons (kN)
- Performance: (Approx. 80% force absorption).
- Selection Criteria: Reserved for extreme risk applications where the severity of a potential impact is critical. The absolute priority is force mitigation. It is used in heavy demolition, mining equipment maintenance, or tasks with a high risk of crushing.
Important Technical Note: The final glove rating (1, 2, or 3) is determined by the lowest performance achieved in all test areas (fingers or knuckles). This ensures that the advertised protection level applies to the entire hand, not just its strongest point.
Key Differentiation: ANSI 138 vs. EN 388 (Marked "P")
It is crucial for the security professional not to equate the ANSI 138 standard with the impact test of the European standard EN 388:2016.
- EN 388 (Marked "P"): Provides a binary classification of "Pass" (P) or "Fail". This test is only performed on the knuckles .
- ANSI 138: Offers a 3-level performance scale and requires testing on both knuckles and fingers .
A glove may obtain the EN 388 "P" marking and yet offer no finger protection. For a complete risk assessment in the North American market, actively search for the ANSI/ISEA 138 pictogram.
Conclusion: An Investment Based on Technical Support
Selecting impact gloves based on the ANSI/ISEA 138 standard grounds PPE decisions in measurable data. This allows safety professionals to move from reactive purchasing to strategic investment in prevention .
By requiring certified products, a validated performance standard is ensured, the investment is justified, and, most importantly, real and quantifiable protection for workers is provided.