ISHN logo
search
cart
facebook twitter linkedin youtube
  • Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
ISHN logo
  • NEWS
    • Today's News
    • Global Safety News
    • Government Regulations
  • PRODUCTS
    • Product Innovations
    • Featured Products
  • TOPICS
    • Environmental Health and Safety
    • Facility Safety
    • Workplace Health
    • Occupational Safety
    • PPE
    • More Topics
  • CONSTRUCTION
  • TECHNOLOGY
  • COLUMNS
    • Best Practices
    • Dave Johnson: What’s going on
    • Editorial Comments
    • Leading Safety
  • MULTIMEDIA
    • ISHN Podcast
    • Videos
    • Cold Stress Education Quiz
    • Webinars
    • White Papers
  • MORE
    • Buyer's Guide
    • Newsletters
    • Convention Companion
    • Polls
    • Events
    • ISHN Store
    • Sponsor Insights
  • EMAGAZINE
    • eMagazine
    • Archived Issues
    • Contact
    • Advertise
  • JOIN TODAY!
Occupational SafetyPPE

How to evaluate glove cut ratings

By Beatrice Deffrenne
July 12, 2010


We want to assist you in understanding how cut test methods are performed and calculated into a Cut Level Rating. Currently the cut resistance of protective gloves is assessed using two test methods:
  • For the European market, the mandatory standard is EN 388 (first version: 1994 – current version: 2004).
  • In the U.S. market, the standard is ASTM F1790 (first version: 1997 – current version: 2005). This method was adopted by ISO in 1999 as an international standard: ISO 13997.


EN method

EN method uses a circular blade with a constant pressure of 5 N (~ 500 grams) applied to the blade. The blade makes an alternating horizontal movement over 50 mm (2 inches) of the glove material and rotates in the opposite direction of the movement. This results in a sinusoidal blade speed with a maximum of 100 mm/second.

The value measured is the number of cycles it takes to cut the material. A cotton reference material is used to control the sharpness of the blade. Test on the cotton material is performed before and after test on glove material, then the average value of cycles for the cotton material (Cn) is calculated. This value is correlated with the value obtained for glove material (Tn) using the following equation: In = (Cn + Tn)/Cn, where “In” is the index value for the test sequence. Index value is a number without unit and is also called “cut index”. Five test sequences (cut on the reference/cut on glove material/cut on the reference) are performed and the average index value I is calculated.

EN 388 defines five levels of cut resistance with level 1 being the least and level 5 being the most cut-resistant gloves:

A drawback of the EN test method is that it is not, for the most part, representative of the cut risks end-users are exposed to in industrial workplaces:
  • the 5 N (~ 500 grams) pressure applied on the blade is too low;
  • the alternating displacement of the blade makes the contact time with the glove sample very short.
Moreover, EN 388 is not suitable for high cut resistance materials. High cut resistant materials dull the blade quickly by the numerous alternating movements required to cut the sample, thus results are overestimated.

ASTM method

ASTM method uses a 50 mm (2 inch) length straight blade, which is moved one time across the glove material under a given load, at a constant speed of 2.5 mm/s. The test result is expressed as the load required to cut the glove material after the blade travels 20 mm (3/4 inch). This load is called rating force (unit of grams force), with a larger load indicating a higher cut resistance. A series of tests are performed with different loads (minimum three) and blade displacements necessary to cut the sample are recorded. From this data, load vs. distance curve is plotted and the rating force is determined.

ASTM method is more representative of workplace conditions vs. the EN method:
  • The straight blade cuts the material in a single stroke; which is the mechanism involved when there is a risk of laceration with a sharp edge such as knife or box cutter;
  • Various weight loads are applied to the blade as it travels across the glove material.
ASTM F1790 does not specify any level of performance. The classification for cut resistance is provided by ANSI/ISEA 105-2005 standard. ANSI/ISEA refers to the previous version of ASTM test method (ASTM F1790-97) where the reference displacement for the blade was 25 mm (1 inch) vs. 20 mm (3/4 inch) for the current version ASTM F1790-05.

It is worth noting both cut test methods use control weight, not sudden force, which is very often the case in the workplace. The current ASTM test method will provide a reliable glove selection component when choosing cut protective gloves to protect workers in your facilities.

Moderate/standard protection: Level 1 to 2 according to ANSI/ISEA cut standard. These woven gloves allow the skin to breathe more easily. They are recommended for continuous use in situations where the objects handled are only mildly abrasive, i.e. using a safety knife or handling untrimmed sheet metal.

Heavy duty/high-performance protection: Level 3 to 5 according to ANSI/ISEA cut standard. These gloves have been coated or are multi-layered to improve their resistance to frequent contact with sharp or abrasive objects. As a result, they have a longer service life, i.e. repeated handling of heavy and rough, sharp-edged parts.

Share This Story

Looking for a reprint of this article?
From high-res PDFs to custom plaques, order your copy today!

Beatrice is MAPA laboratory manager and Carmen Castro is MAPA marketing & product development manager.

Recommended Content

JOIN TODAY
to unlock your recommendations.

Already have an account? Sign In

  • forklift safety

    Exploring the latest technologies in forklift safety

    With more staff and more stock in warehousing now more...
    Workplace Training Strategies
    By: Josh Cramer
  • welding

    All about welder’s flash or arc eye

    A flash burn is a painful inflammation of the cornea,...
    Environmental Health and Safety
  • dangerous jobs

    The 10 most dangerous jobs in the U.S.

    On-the-job deaths have been rising — hitting the highest...
    Occupational Safety
    By: Benita Mehta
Manage My Account
  • eMagazine Subscriptions
  • ISHN Newsletter & Other Newsletter Alerts
  • Online Registration
  • Manage My Preferences
  • Subscription Customer Service

More Videos

Sponsored Content

Sponsored Content is a special paid section where industry companies provide high quality, objective, non-commercial content around topics of interest to the ISHN audience. All Sponsored Content is supplied by the advertising company and any opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily reflect the views of ISHN or its parent company, BNP Media. Interested in participating in our Sponsored Content section? Contact your local rep!

close
  • man wearing the the Sundström SR200 Full Face Mask Respirator
    Sponsored byOHD

    5 Fit Testing Mistakes That Could Cost You

  • This image shows Magid AcuSpex polarized blue mirrored safety glasses.
    Sponsored byMagid Glove and Safety

    Construction PPE Guide: What Crews Need for Each Task

  • lone worker in confined space
    Sponsored byAlphasense Ltd.

    GET THE LEAD OUT of your Safety Oxygen Sensors!

Popular Stories

SpaceX 7 launch

OSHA Investigating Fatal Fall at SpaceX Starbase

Automated loading dock equipment

After March 2026 Rivian Death, Safety Managers Reassess Loading Dock Systems Under OSHA's Warehouse Emphasis Program

psychology in the workplace

Most Workplaces Measure Psychological Safety, Ignoring Psychosocial Risks

top 10 most dangerous jobs

Poll

Seasonal Readiness

With the federal heat stress prevention rule on the horizon, which area of your safety program needs the most attention?
View Results Poll Archive

Products

Surviving an OSHA Audit A Management Guide, 2nd Edition

Surviving an OSHA Audit A Management Guide, 2nd Edition

See More Products

ISHN Podcasts

Related Articles

  • How to evaluate gloves without standardized testing

    See More
  • It’s important to evaluate COF to determine footwear’s slip resistance

    It’s important to evaluate COF to determine footwear’s slip resistance

    See More
  • Make time to evaluate your respiratory protection program

    See More

Related Products

See More Products
  • Top Ten Pitfalls in OSHA Recordkeeping and How to Avoid Them

See More Products

Related Directories

  • Superior Glove

    Superior Glove is a leading innovator in the design and manufacture of safety gloves and sleeves. Since 1910, we have been protecting workers across the globe with specialized hand and arm protection for every major industry.
  • ESAB Welding & Cutting

    At ESAB, we exist to shape the future of welding and cutting. We connect fabricators with the widest range of products and PPE under our industry-leading brand portfolio with the latest technologies to solve virtually any industry challenge — then we back it up with our knowledge, experience and passion to help them be more productive than ever before. To learn more, visit esab.com or call 1-800-ESAB-123.
×

Become a Leader in Safety Culture

Build your knowledge with ISHN, covering key safety, health and industrial hygiene news, products, and trends.

JOIN TODAY
  • RESOURCES
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
    • Directories
    • Manufacturing Division
    • Store
    • Want More
  • SIGN UP TODAY
    • Create Account
    • eMagazine
    • Newsletters
    • Customer Service
    • Manage Preferences
  • SERVICES
    • Marketing Services
    • Reprints
    • Market Research
    • List Rental
    • Survey/Respondent Access
  • STAY CONNECTED
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
    • X (Twitter)
  • PRIVACY
    • PRIVACY POLICY
    • TERMS & CONDITIONS
    • DO NOT SELL MY PERSONAL INFORMATION
    • PRIVACY REQUEST
    • ACCESSIBILITY

Copyright ©2026. All Rights Reserved BNP Media, Inc. and BNP Media II, LLC.

Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing