The EN 388 standard is commonplace across Europe when it comes to evaluating the durability of safety gloves. This European standard outlines the specific testing procedures and performance metrics manufacturers must meet when designing and marketing gloves as protection against mechanical risks.
The goal is to provide consistency and reliability when selecting specialized gloves for workplace safety. Without clear standards, claims of “cut-resistant” or “high-abrasion” would be open to interpretation. EN 388 brings objectivity into the process so buyers can trust the level of protection promised.
The standard gets quite technical in the precise procedures and equipment specifications involved in rigorously assessing qualities like abrasion resistance, blade cut resistance, tearing resistance, and puncture resistance. But the focus here will be on distilling how the standard impacts glove selection for safety officers and workers on the front lines.
The numerical ratings, testing updates, and recent revisions may sound complex. However, this guide breaks down the key points in straightforward terms on what wearers need to understand most when picking gloves rated and tested to EN 388.
The EN 388 Standard Overview
First and foremost, EN 388 looks at how protective gloves stand up to risks like abrasion, slicing cuts, tears, and perforations. Safety managers need to know the facts on whether their team’s gloves provide genuine, proven protection.
The standard determines those answers through verifiable lab test procedures, including:
●Abrasion Resistance Checks: Gloves get scrubbed vigorously with an abrasive surface until worn through, assessing durability.
●Cut Resistance Tests: Precise cutting machines assess how many cycles it takes to slice through the glove material.
●Tear Resistance Trials: The force needed to rip the glove fabric is measured.
●Puncture Tests: A pointed tool analyzes puncture potential by applying escalating pressure.
Impact protection was added to the evaluation process as well in recent years, quantifying how well gloves absorb and disperse the energy from sudden impacts.
After undergoing those rigorous EN 388 test triangles, gloves get clearly rated on their measurable performance. The ratings take the form of an easy-to-decipher pictogram included right on the product labeling.
So buyers can feel confident they have key indicators of protection levels against documented mechanical hazards. No guesswork is needed!
And EN 388 isn’t just informal advice – it’s the legally required standard enforced by manufacturers for certified protective equipment across Europe. Regular updates keep advancing the standard, too.
Abrasion Resistance
Abrasion resistance offers a tangible way to measure how durable a protective glove will be when confronted with rough surfaces, friction, and general wear and tear. The EN 388 abrasion test gives quantifiable data to compare products.
Abrasion Test Method
During testing, gloves get secured in place while an abrasive piece of sandpaper is scrubbed across the material under controlled pressure. The scrubbing action gets ramped up in cycles until visible holes emerge.
The number of scrub cycles the glove can withstand before failing reveals its abrasion grade on a scale of 0 to 4. So buyers get an at-a-glance indicator of durability from the EN 388 label.
Abrasion Performance Levels
While EN 388:2003 used fixed parameters, EN 388:2016 tailored the variables to modern materials in the upgraded test. But both versions provide standardization helpful for safety planning.
Here’s how the easily-referenced grades break down:
●Level 0: Less than 100 cycles
●Level 1: 100-499 cycles
●Level 2: 500-1,999 cycles
●Level 3: 2,000-7,999 cycles
●Level 4: 8,000+ cycles
With that abrasion-resistant rating system, managers can better match worksite conditions to glove requirements, protecting workers from the elements.
Cut Resistance
When on job sites with sharp tools or machinery, workers rely on their gloves to resist cuts and gashes. EN 388 puts gloves through rigorous blade-based tests to quantify that protection.
Coupe Test
The Coupe Test counts the repetitive slices by a circular sawing blade needed to penetrate a glove’s material. The higher the count, the better the score on a 1-5 rating scale, level 5 representing the highest resistance to cutting.
TDM-100 Cut Test
The TDM-100 Cut Test(ISO 13997 Test) is designed to assess extreme cut resistance with more precision than previous methods. This advanced instrumentation measures the exact grams of cutting force needed for a blade to penetrate a glove sample while accounting for deteriorating sharpness. For applications with severe cut hazards, the TDM-100 test provides maximum accuracy in rating glove protection capabilities.
Cut Resistance Performance Levels
The EN 388 standard assigns performance levels to cut-resistant gloves based on the outcome of the tests mentioned above. The following table summarizes the performance levels:
| EN 388 Level | Coupe Test (1-5) | TDM Test/ISO 13997 Test (A-F) |
| 1/A | Level 1 | Level A (2 – 5 N) |
| 2/B | Level 2 | Level B (5 – 10 N) |
| 3/C | Level 3 | Level C (10 – 15 N) |
| 4/D | Level 4 | Level D (15 – 22 N) |
| 5/E | Level 5 | Level E (22 – 30 N) |
| F | N/A | Level F(>30 N ) |
So whether assessing slices-to-failure, maximum cut force in newtons, or precision cutting edge machines, EN 388 provides the key dataset for choosing suitable hand protection. Relying on buzzwords doesn’t provide that assurance.
Manufacturers ultimately have to meet the EN 388 benchmarks consistently before labeling gloves as cut-resistant. So buyers can trust the rating codes reflect genuine, standardized verification processes.
Tear Resistance
Abrupt tearing represents another common form of wear and tear gloves must withstand on worksites. The EN 388 tear resistance test simulates such stress to gauge material fortitude.
Tear Resistance Testing
The method fixes glove samples between clamps and pulls them apart at a set speed. The force in newtons needed to induce fracturing gets recorded as the tear rating. Steps include:
●Cutting test swatches to standardized sizing
●Adding initial controlled slices
●Clamping with calibrated spacing
●Pulling at a 100mm/minute pace
●Documenting tearing Newton’s levels
With its rigorous control of variables impacting ripping, the EN 388 tear procedure ensures apple-to-apple assessments of the sturdiness of different materials.
Safety managers can then directly compare ratings to find the right level of glove reinforcement across tasks posing tear hazards.
Tear Performance Levels
Regarding performance levels, the EN 388 standard specifies a numerical scale that represents the material’s ability to resist tearing:
| Performance Level | Minimum Force (Newton) |
| 1 | 10 |
| 2 | 25 |
| 3 | 50 |
| 4 | 75 |
Materials are assigned a performance level based on the amount of force in Newtons required to tear the glove material. A higher performance level number corresponds to greater tear resistance.
This designation helps users select appropriate gloves by aligning the performance level with their specific task requirements.
Puncture Resistance
Sharp tools and debris on chaotic job sites threaten hands with potential puncture accidents. EN 388 testing applies controlled puncture force to evaluate glove robustness.
Puncture Test
The puncture test, as stipulated by EN 388:2003, uses a standardized blunt probe. Samples get mounted and then penetrated while steadily elevating the pressure. The newtons of force at puncture failure quantify resilience.
Puncture Performance Levels
Higher newton thresholds before puncturing occurs mean better protection. Performance level 4 stands for the highest degree of resistance that can be provided by the glove material under EN 388:2003 standards. This rating communicates to workers and managers the actual rigidity levels of glove materials against sharp surprises.
Results fall along a scale from 1-4:
| EN 388:2003 Puncture Resistance Levels | Maximum Force (Newton) |
| Level 1 | Up to 20N |
| Level 2 | Up to 60N |
| Level 3 | Up to 100N |
| Level 4 | More than 100N |
With clear metrics aligned to simulated poke testing, glove buyers can better match requisite durability to puncture risks in their work environments for confidence in prevention.
Impact Protection
Protecting hands from the sudden blunt forces on an industrial worksite presents unique risks for safety managers to evaluate. EN 388:2016 introduced an impact test to quantify that force dispersion capacity.Protecting hands from the sudden blunt forces on an industrial worksite presents unique risks for safety managers to evaluate. EN 388:2016 introduced an impact test to quantify that force dispersion capacity.
Impact Test Procedure
The test uses a weighted pendulum striker allowed to smash onto glove samples from set drop heights. Sensors measure the energy transmitted upon violent contact. Minimum thresholds must prevent complete failure.
Impact Performance Classification
Two simple performance ratings give immediate indicators:
●Level 0: Failed minimum integrity requirements
●Level 1: Passed baseline impact resistance
While passing gloves earn a “P” icon( marked with “X” or left blank are untested. ), not all products undergo this advanced assessment. But for metal works, construction, and other high kinetic energy environments, verified impact defenses bring essential reassurances.
By replicating collisions under controlled conditions, EN 388 enables the necessity of impact-resistant certifications based on hard data – preventing assumptions and injuries.
Glove Rating Icons & Labels
After certifying protective qualities through various EN 388 test procedures, the results are exhibited directly on glove labeling. Standardized icons and codes inform buyers and workers about compliance.
Glove Marking Requirements
The abrasion, cut, tear, and puncture ratings shown provide quantified insight into glove robustness against common hazards. Impact resistance earns a “P” icon if it passes minimum benchmarks, too.
While chemical handling relies on other protocols, the marks offer immediately visible assurance of minimum verified mechanical defenses, e.g.:
●4321X = Decent abrasion, good cuts, average tears, subpar punctures
●4344XP = Excellent abrasion, good tears, suitable punctures + impacts
Though not a perfect proxy for overall glove dexterity, higher abrasion and puncture scores suggest decent grip capabilities as well.
Rather than just taking a manufacturer’s word on critical safety metrics, EN 388 equips workplaces with the shorthand to assess and select appropriate protection independently.
It’s important to note that EN 388 markings do not cover chemical or thermal risks, assessed under different standards.
Additional Considerations
Precision Cut Analysis
The TDM-100 test is referenced in EN ISO 13997, which is a more precise method for assessing cut resistance in protective gloves. It measures the force in grams required to cut through the glove material with a 20mm travel of a sharp blade.
Results from this test provide a more nuanced understanding of a glove’s protective capability and help ensure a higher degree of reliability for users requiring secure hand protection against cuts.
Comparison with ANSI/ISEA 105
Understanding the EN 388 standard also involves comparing it with other international standards, such as the ANSI/ISEA 105 used in the United States.
EN 388 and ANSI/ISEA 105 both categorize gloves based on their ability to resist mechanical risks, but they use different testing methods and rating systems. For instance, ANSI/ISEA 105 measures cut resistance on a scale denoted by an “A” followed by a number indicating the cut level, while EN 388 utilizes both the Coupe Test and TDM-100 results reported as a letter value corresponding to the level of resistance.
Gloves certified under both standards offer users more comprehensive information for making informed decisions on hand protection.
Perguntas Frequentes
The EN 388 standard is crucial in defining the protective features of gloves against mechanical risks. These questions address common inquiries about the standard’s application and specifications.
What does the EN 388 standard signify for protective gloves?
EN 388 is a European Standard that specifies requirements and test methods for gloves designed to protect against mechanical hazards, including abrasion, blade cut, tear, and puncture.
How can one interpret the information provided by an EN 388 rating?
An EN 388 rating is given as a series of numbers and letters, each representing a protective feature: abrasion resistance, cut resistance (coup test), tear resistance, puncture resistance, and, if applicable, cut resistance (ISO 13997 test), and impact protection.
Higher numbers denote better performance in the respective test.
What differences exist between the ANSI and EN 388 standards regarding protective gloves?
EN 388 is a European standard, while ANSI/ISEA 105 is an American standard, both evaluate glove protection but use different test methods and rating systems. For instance, ANSI/ISEA 105 employs a nine-level cut resistance scale, while EN 388 uses a six-level scale (A to F) for the ISO cut test.
Are gloves rated with EN 388 adequate for protecting against mechanical hazards?
Gloves rated with EN 388 are tested to assess their adequacy in protecting against various mechanical risks. However, the suitability of a glove for specific applications depends on its rating and the level of exposure to these hazards.
How has the EN 388 standard been updated in the EN 388:2016+A1:2018 revision?
The EN 388:2016+A1:2018 revision includes the introduction of the ISO 13997 cut resistance test for materials that dull the Coup Test blade and an impact protection test for gloves claiming this feature. The test results are now integrated into the rating pictogram.
Can gloves certified under EN 388 also provide electrical insulation?
EN 388 certified gloves are designed for mechanical protection and do not inherently provide electrical insulation. Gloves intended for electrical insulation are covered by EN 60903 and should be selected based on the specific electrical protection required.