PPE - THE VALUE OF A TOP BRAND

A colleague recently asked me if I thought a product brand was "aging". I had to think about it for a while because "aging" is not a term I was familiar with in terms of brands. But the more I thought about it, the more I realized that there might be confusion between classic brands longevity and "aging" in the context of losing properties or function.

Recently, a study was done on the top brands in our daily lives. The graph below shows the results:

With very few exceptions, the brands that we value most have been on the market, and been the top in their category for a very long time. Most for 50 to a 100 years or more. Why? Because they provide products we like and they have not changed them just for the sake of change or to try to give the appearance of not "aging". They have added products, gotten bigger and stronger, but they still produce the classic products we expect from them.

The same is true in Personal Protective Equipment.  The top brands have longevity on a par with the top consumer products shown above:

Each of these brands is a leader in their product catagory and each has been on the market for 50 to 100 years and more. Are they "aging" or are they traditional, classic brands of PPE that have kept millions of workers safe over the years?. Each company has under gone at least some degree of change over the years, but they continue to produce the core products, the "classics" that established their brand and kept it in the forefront over the years.

50 years ago, MSA, Fibre-Metal and Bullard were the top 3 brands of head protection. They still are today. 50 years ago, Fibre-Metal, Jackson and Sellstrom were the top 3 brands of welding helmets. They still are today. And there is a reason for that. The CEO of a Top 400 Construction Company said that "PPE is one of the top 10 most important things we buy and for that reason, we only consider the top brands".

There are some commodities where customers value trendy products, and the latest fads, and want whatever is "new" no matter whether "new" is "better" or not. They want change for change sake because they think it some how makes them more contemporary. But PPE is not one of those commodities. It is serious business. It is relied upon to save lives and prevent serious injuries that can affect the quality of life. For those reasons, buyers want experience and expertise. They want companies and products with long track records of success that they can rely upon.

That is not to say that PPE users do not value and want innovation. What they actually value the most is the brands that provide a good blend of tradition and innovation. Evolution, not revolution. Look at head protection for example. Not only are the same 3 brands still the market leaders, the same 3 products are still the market leaders. But the Fibre-Metal model has been continually upgraded. First Fibre-Metal introduced the ratchet headband to the trade which provided new functionality without changing the classic design or SUPEREIGHT Impact Energy Control System workers relied on. The entire head protection industry followed and today most protective caps sold contain a ratchet headband. Fibre-Metal followed that up with the introduction of their patented SWINGSTRAP which again made their classic cap more functional for those who had to mount a welding helmet or faceshield.

Most head protection users consider the Fibre-Metal brand head protection the most innovative and sophisticated on the market

Few would describe it as "aging" even though it has been protecting workers for more than 60 years and is, in fact, the original Fibre-Metal protective cap design, with occasional updates as head protection needs have changed. I have never heard an end user ask for it to be changed.  To the contrary, I have received numerous comments over the years asking that it NOT be changed. I am sure that the other PPE brand leaders have had the same experience with their classic products.

A Vice-President of Xerox Corporation said "the strongest, most compelling brands are the ones that stay fresh in the minds of customers and prospects. They convey a consistent message to an audience every time they encounter it, but always in new and unexpected ways that suggest the brand can do things no other brand can do". This is very true with the brand leaders in PPE.

Take the Fibre-Metal brand of head protection as an example again. A long time user recently said "when I think of head protection, I think of Fibre-Metal and have for years. But now, when I think of Fibre-Metal, I think of the possibility of driving my injury costs down even lower and increasing my productivity. I just don't get the sense that other brands can address those things"

When you go through your due diligence to evaluate and select the best PPE for your operation, make sure you understand the difference between an "aging brand", one that is no longer capable of doing the job for you, and a traditional, classic brand with the experience and expertise, tempered with the right blend of innovation, that will do for you what it has done for countless others over the years. It is fine to look for what is new, but in PPE, "new" is not good enough. Make sure it is better than the classic brands in enough ways to make a difference. You do not want to use your workforce as a test lab for an new product from an unknown source. You usually cannot go wrong with the brand leaders.

BEFORE YOU SELECT HEAD PROTECTION COMPARE WITH THE BEST

In any product class, there is an exemplar; an archetype that defines the best in class. The model that all others are compared with. From our experience, numerous testimonials, expert opinion and anecdotal evidence, the archetype in head protection today is the Fibre-Metal by Honeywell, SUPEREIGHT, SWINGSTRAP series. They provide a level of next generation head protection sophistication not available in other brands.

But don't take our word for it.  Find out for yourself, with your employees, on your job, under your working conditions. Using the SUPEREIGHT hats and caps as your exemplar, compare whatever head protection you are using, or are considering using, with them. If you determine that another brand can help you increase the number of employees who wear their head protection, reduce the frequency and severity of head injuries, reduce your injury costs, increase productivity, the quality of work life and ultimately, the profitability of your business better than the Fibre-Metal models, by all means, chose it.  But if what you are using or considering comes up short in a side-by-side comparison, obtain samples to evaluate. Just make sure you have a list of specific things you want to determine. Don't just say "try these to see if you like them". Ask "are these caps more comfortable, are they more adjustable for an individual fit and feel, is the combined full sweatband plus a ratchet better for you, etc."  Use the illustration below as a guide:

You can also refer to our last post for a questionnaire that will help you determine if you are getting everything possible from your head protection. Sometimes it helps to take a piece of paper and make two columns. Label one of the columns "GOT" and the other "GET". In the column labeled "GOT", list the things you have, the things you like, about the present brand you are using. In the column labeled "GET", list all of the things you will get from the Fibre-Metal SUPEREIGHT brand that you are not now getting. If the "GET" column is of value to you in equipping your workers with the best possible head protection, switch to the Fibre-Metal brand. If you are already getting everything you need, and are eliminating as much risk as possible with another brand stay with what works for you. But you owe it to yourself and your workforce to at least go through the comparison and evaluation process.

TIME TO REEVALUATE AND UPGRADE YOUR HEAD PROTECTION

The weather is turning nicer in most parts of the country. Construction, even if at lower levels than in the past, is starting up, and industrial employment appears to be inching up. Now is a good time to take a good look at the head protection PPE you are using or supplying to your employees.

Don't just look at the protective caps themselves. Go back over the due diligence you did when you bought them. Reevaluate your buying decision. Why did you buy that brand and model? What choice criteria did you use? Do you feel comfortable that you learned all you could about head protection before you made your buying decision.  If you don't or you want a quick review, scroll back and re-read our blog posts dated March 21,2011, November 2, 2009, October 13, 2009, and August 13, 2009.

Ask does your head protection help reduce injury costs, increase productivity, enhance quality of work life and improve profitability? A way to check is to evaluate it using the following questionnaire:

If you can answer "yes" to each of those questions, you are using state-of-the-art head protection and your evaluation should just be to make sure that your protective caps are in good condition. Check for torn, frayed or worn suspension straps. Look for any cracks, chips, scuffs or a dull "chalky" appearance. If something doesn't look right, replace it.

But if you answer "no" to any of the questions, check with your current source to see why your protective caps are missing something. Ask them to upgrade you to their model that has all of the above. If they can't, you should change suppliers to one that lets you answer "yes" to the state-of-the-art questions. Fibre-Metal by Honeywell SUPEREIGHT brand head protection is one brand that can help you answer "yes" to everything you need. If there are others, put them side-by-side with a SUPEREIGHT cap, compare them, and select the one that best satisfies your needs.

"Struck by an object" is still one of the most frequent injury causes and head injuries are among the most costly of any injury type. Don't take chances, don't incur any risk that you don't have to and you don't have to as long as you have an upgrade alternative.

BE WARY OF ADF GIMMICKS

Auto Darkening Filters were conceived and developed to be serious safety and productivity tools for professional, electric arc production welders. Welding helmets are designed and produced to protect electric arc welders from sparks, spatter and radiation emanating from the arc. Neither device was intended to be used for any other purpose.

But today there are welding helmets equipped with ADF's that advertise they can be used for grinding and Oxy-Fuel welding and cutting. The question is not "can they", it is "should they" and are they the most appropriate PPE for those operations?. Or are those claims just another of the many sales gimmicks that permeate and distort the ADF marketplace.

For many years, standards and common practice dictated that a faceshield, not a welding helmet, be used for grinding. ANSI Z49.1 2005, the welding safety standard, includes the following:

"E4.2.1.1 Welding helmets  with filter lenses are intended to protect users from arc rays and fiom weld sparks and spatter which impinge directly against the hel­met. They are not intended to protect against slag chips, grinding fragments, wire wheel blistles, and similar haz­ards. Spectacles with side shields or goggles should also be wom to protect against these hazards."

But Z49.1 defers to ANSI Z87.1 2010 for PPE and Z87.1 requires all face and eye products, including welding helmets, to be tested and certified as either "impact" or "non-impact" devices. Some ADF helmet suppliers misinterpret this "impact" rating as confirmation that their product can be used for grinding when, in fact, there are a number of other things that must be taken into consideration.

To begin with, it is highly unlikely that a production welder would complete his weld, extinguish his torch, locate and set up his grinder without taking off his welding helmet. So the argument that using an ADF helmet for grinding saves downtime is specious at best. When the weld is complete, removing the helmet and putting on a faceshield before grinding takes no time at all.

The next consideration is field of vision. Why would a welder want to only be able to see through a 2"X41/4" or 5"X4" opening in a welding helmet with a green tint, when he could look through a clear faceshield, with a full field of vision, to do the hazardous and precise job of cleaning and grinding a weld? Some might argue a welding helmet covers more face area than a faceshield. That all depends on the size and shape of the faceshield selected.

This heavy duty faceshield from Fibre-Metal by Honeywell, has a wide, deep, uniquely shaped window that covers as much face area as most welding helmets while giving the welder a 360 degree view of his work. And the window, unlike a welding helmet, is made from a material specifically formulated to protect from impact and penetration. A faceshield window like the one above may cost between $10.00 and $15.00. A professional grade welding helmet with ADF will cost about $300.00. Windows are consumables. They are intended to be used and replaced as often as needed. Why would you or your company want you to risk damaging your $300 helmet by subjecting it to the debris from grinding and chipping?

In addition to the risks of grinding with a helmet instead of a faceshield, there are risks inherent in grinding with an ADF lens. In order to grind with an ADF lens in place, the auto darkening function has to be deactivated. If a welder forgets to turn it back on, and strikes an arc, he will only have shade 3 protection from the bright visible light of the arc. Although he will be protected from IR/UV by the permanent interference filter in the lens, being exposed to the bright light of the arc can be painful for some time. A number of the ADF lenses with a "grind mode", have a feature that automatically reactivates the auto darkening function after a period of time. Those lenses are generally super sensitive to extraneous light. A welder could still be grinding, have someone else in the area strike an arc which could trigger his arc putting him in the dark with a dangerous grinder in his hands putting him at high risk of a serious injury.

All standards, past and present, all "application charts", and industry practice since the process was devised show welding goggles, and more recently, faceshields with protective spectacles, are the proper and most appropriate PPE for OxyFuel welding and cutting. So why would anyone want to use a full welding helmet with an ADF for that purpose? Again, it is highly unlikely that a production electric arc welder would have to or want to extinguish his torch, go get his OxyFuel apparatus and begin a new job all with his welding helmet on. And when he does begin his OxyFuel job, he will slip a pair of welding goggles or a lightweight faceshield on rather than his ADF welding helmet for the same reasons mentioned earlier.

The brands and models that offer this option by leaving the helmet in an "off" (usually shade 5) mode, present the same risk as turning the auto darkening function off for grinding. Other brands and models introduce another risk by requiring a welder to select a shade from a much greater range. Some models offer 3 sets of shades: 5 to 8, 8 to 10, and 10 to 13 with the 5 to 8 range for OXyFuel welding and cutting. That presents the risk of a welder selecting the wrong shade by accident, especially with small dials or buttons and big gloves, which could cause exposure to bright light and discomfort.

Going back to the beginning, a welding helmet equipped with an ADF is intended for and designed for enhancing safety and increasing the productivity of professional, production welders. Using them for anything else is not a proper use and could expose the wearer to additional risk while exposing the helmet to damage and a shortened service life. A top quality ADF only needs 3 functions; sensitivity, shade selection, closing delay. There is value in simplicity.

Some brands have so many dials, buttons, and switches they confuse the user. Anything beyond the functions shown above are superfluous, and are either useless gimmicks or warnings for things that go wrong.

Much of the PPE function is determing the best and most appropriate PPE for a specific function and set of hazards. Claiming an ADF helmet can be used for grinding and OxyFuel welding and cutting violates that goal and is usually used as a sales gimmick by those suppliers who cannot compete against the top ADF brands in the electric arc market.

_________________________________________________________

WARNING: Always read all labels, instruction, warnings, limitations and cautions on any PPE used in grinding. Make sure any PPE used for grinding is marked "ANSI Z87+" or "ANSI Z87.1 High Impact". Even products labeled ANSI "high impact" provide limited protection and do not protect from exploding grinding wheels or other extreme impacts. Always wear ANSI certified "high impact" protective spectacles under faceshields and welding helmets. Products shown are used for illustration and information only. The writer makes no endorsement or suitability claims. The selection of PPE should only be done by responsible safety officials, after a comprehensive hazard analysis and using OSHA selection guidelines.

VERIFY THE QUALITY OF AUTO DARKENING FILTER LENSES

In our last post we talked about the need to separate welding helmets with ADF's from the leading helmet manufacturers from those being imported by welding machine manufacturers, welding supply distributors and Internet Marketers. In this post we will talk about what to look for in an ADF to verify that it is a top quality filter lens with certification from the leading certification bureaus in the world.

The first place to look to determine and confirm the quality of an ADF is the markings on the lens. The first marking, moving left to right, confirms the selectable shade range. The next marking is the most important. It confirms the optical quality ratings according to the EN 379 Standard. The third marking is the DIN Plus designation confirming that the ADF has been tested by a third party testing agency. These verifications of quality are a must if you only want to invest in a ADF that will increase welder safety and comfort, improve productivity and increase profitability.

The Standards situation is more complex with ADF's than it is with any other PPE product. A detailed explanation is beyond the scope of a blog post. But in summary, there are ANSI and CSA Standards for ADF's but they are not as rigorous and complete as the European Standards. EN 379 is the recognized standard worldwide for ADF quality. Understanding that optical quality must be maximized, EN 379 sets high performance requirements in the four primary factors that determine ADF optical quality.

Those factors are:

• Spherical, astigmatic and prismatic refractive powers (optical quality)
• Diffusion of light (scattering)
• Variations in luminous transmittance (homogeneity)
• Angle dependence of luminous transmittance (angular dependence).

The first statements are the official, scientific terms of the standard. The comments in parentheses are the more common terms for them. In layman's language, they measure the optical clarity (absence of hazing and other visual defects) of the ADF in both the light and dark stages, the quality of visual definition (lack of distortion), how clearly the arc can be seen in low light conditions, angular dependency (the ability to retain shading when viewing at an angle), and the over all optical quality of the lens.

Each property can be marked from 1 to 3, with 1 exceeding the highest requirement and 3 the minimum still acceptable. ADF's with results over 3 do not pass the tests and cannot acquire the CE and other European certificates and therefore should not be considered.

While all of the measures of optical quality are important when selecting an ADF lens, perhaps the most important is angular dependency. It was an option in the EN 379 Standard until 2009 when it was made mandatory. The truth of the matter is most of the major welding helmets with ADF's do well in the first 3 measures of optical quality. But most of them struggle with angular dependency.

Angular dependency measures the shade level not only perpendicularly through the ADF, but also at slant angles. Most ADF's show a significant decrease in shade level at angles larger than 10 degrees. The welder’s viewing angle through a helmet equipped with an ADF is about +/- 30 degrees, so within this angle range it is necessary to provide as little shade level variation as possible. Most brands available on the market vary up to 3-4 shade levels within +/- 30 degrees. That is quite annoying for a welder and although it does not directly affect eye safety, it adversely affects welders working comfort, causing eye fatigue because of constant adjustment of the eye’s iris to the shade level variations. If a welder tries to compensate by assuming uncomfortable working positions, neck and back pain can result.

New Angular Dependence Compensation (ADC) technology being marketed by Fibre-Metal by Honeywell in their High Performance ADC brand ADF's provides a solution with only up to one shade level variation within +/- 30 degrees of perpendicular viewing. It was achieved by new technology and a new design of the internal structure of the lens. It is the only ADFin the world to achieve a 1/1/1/1 EN 379 Standard rating for optical quality. The Fibre-Metal by Honeywell ADC series consists of the ADC model with an EN 379 optical quality rating of 1/1/1/2 and the ADC Plus model with a 1/1/1/1 optical quality rating.

The DIN mark is important on an ADF lens because it confirms the performance to standards ratings. DIN Certo functions much like SEI (Safety Equipment Institute) does in the United States. An ADF manufacturer can submit a sample to CE to have it tested and can use the CE mark if it passes. But DIN Certo goes way beyond like SEI. They require an audit of the manufacturer’s production premises. They randomly select from production the required number of units of the model being tested and tests them in their test laboratories. All selected samples are tested and all samples have to pass all the tests. A single failure to comply with the standard results in not issuing the DIN certificate.

Once the ADF passes the tests, a retest will follow after one year and when the second test is successfully finished, another retest follows after 4 years. Such permanent monitoring of the manufacturer by the certifying body assures a much higher level of quality to the end user.

DIN Plus certification goes beyond DIN certification by requiring 2 times better results for all protective parameters and 3 times better results for switching speed. The ratings for optical quality, diffusion of light and homogeneity have to be 1/1/1 or at least 1/2/1 or 1/1//2. In addition, the manufacturer has to prove that it has all necessary testing equipment available on site. The correct functioning of the test equipment and production are checked on yearly basis by regular audits by DIN Certco

If you only want to invest in a top quality welding helmet with ADF lens,that you want to contribute to the success of your operation, consider only the major welding helmet manufactuers to begin with. Then take a close look at the ADF. Look for the EN 379 optical quality certification and optical quality ratings and the DIN and DIN Plus independent third party quality assurance markings. Look for the latestest ADF technology like ADC (Angular Dependency Compensation). Then and only then will you select an ADF that will return your investment many times over. Compare. Place various brands side by side and using the information presented here as a guide, see what brand offers what and accept nothing but the best.

AUTO DARKENING FILTERS FOR SERIOUS WELDERS

2011 marks the 30th anniversary of the introduction of auto darkening filter lenses to the welding industry. In 1981, Hornell International based in Sweden introduced their patented SPEEDGLAS in Europe and the US market. Soon after, Hornell, partnered with The Fibre-Metal Products Company, the leading manufacturer of welding helmets in the USA at the time, for Hornell to use their ADF technology to produce an exclusive line of ADF's to fit Fibre-Metal brand helmets. The Fibre-Metal brand and tradition of quality lent some credibility to the new product and together, Fibre-Metal and Hornell pioneered the conversion from passive filter lens to the new ADF technology.

From the beginning, Hornell and Fibre-Metal presented the ADF as a serious welding tool designed to increase safety and improve productivity for production welders. Soon after the first movers penetrated the market, the other major welding helmet manufacturers at the time, Jackson, Sellstrom, and Kedman (Huntsman) followed with their versions and technologies and the market expanded rapidly. Each of them also positioned their ADF's as a serious piece of equipment for the production welding industry.

As the industry grew, every significant improvement in ADF's,  from their inception right through today, came from the original pioneers. But over the years, as the market grew, a glut of lower quality ADF's hit the market, mostly from obscure manufacturers in China and Taiwan. Before long, welding machine manufacturers, welding supply distributors with store brands, and a host of Internet Marketers were in the ADF business; but with a different focus.

Somes primary goal was cheapening up the product to drive the price to the lowest possible level. Others proliferated gimmicks and gadgets that did nothing to advance the technology, improve welder safety or increase productivity. Still others turned to graphics to divert attention from inferior ADF's. Perhaps those things have some appeal to part-time welders, or occasional or home welders. But they do nothing for serious, production welders. The welders who weld all day every day and need the best possible tools to keep them safe and productive. That is why you hardly ever see them in real fab shops, or any place where welding is a serious business.

Unfortunately, over the years there was not much innovation or improvement in technology from the serious ADF producers either - until recently. Sellstrom recently introduced their innovative
MAGSENSE lens that responds to either the light from the arc and/or a magnetic field created by current flowing through the workpiece. The dual mode filter improves switching stability and prevents flickering. They are important advances.

But the most significant advances in ADF technology and performance are coming from the Fibre-Metal by Honeywell brand. Their new High Performance "ADC"(Angular Dependency Compensation) series ADF lenses provide major advances in optical quality - the ability for a welder to see his work more clearly. After a long and successful partnership with Hornell, a number of years ago Fibre-Metal began a new partnership with what has turned out to be the best and most innovative ADF technology in the world. Today, the Fibre-Metal brand ADF technology has produced the ONLY ADF lens in the world with a perfect score of "1" in every optical quality phase of the DIN standard, including angular dependency. The new lenses also improve color recognition which can be an important thing to a production welder.

These advances help keep real production welders safer, and are big boosts to welder productivity. And they are the things ADF's were developed for in the first place. So just as it was in the beginning, the major, top brand welding helmet producers are advancing the state of the ADF art, while the rest of the pack continues to see who can produce the most gaudy graphics, cram in the most useless gadgets, and push prices to even lower levels. None of which helps a production welder or the company that employs him.

If you are in the market for welding helmets with ADF lenses, limit your choice set to the major brands of welding helmet manufacturers you have relied on for years. They are the serious producers of ADF's for real production welders.They are pushing the performance envelope; they are making all of the real ADF advances. You will find what you need from one of them.

PPE AND RISK REDUCTION

Risk assessment and risk reduction are the corner stones of a safety program. Both concepts are simple to understand but complex and difficult to implement. A trained safety official can assess a construction site for example, and recognize that there is a risk of something falling from a third floor and striking somebody below. But he cannot tell when something might fall, what might fall, or the angle at which it might strike someone. So he does what he can to reduce the risk of whatever might fall hurting a worker on the ground.

He can reduce the risk, he cannot eliminate it. Except for respiratory and hearing hazards, that can be measured and protected against with some degree of specificity, most risk can only be reduced, not eliminated. How does this relate to PPE? If a PPE buying decision maker knows that there is a PPE product available, that may be able to protect better than what he is buying, is he not taking a risk by not upgrading to it? Even if it is just the perception of better performance or the probability of better performance, is risk being reduced as much as possible if it is not used?

Consider head protection. Suppose a PPE buying decision maker does his OSHA required due diligence and has learned as much as possible about head protection and how the various designs perform. He will know that there are smooth crown caps and caps with ribs and slots; he will know that there are 8-point suspensions and 4 or 6 point suspensions and he will  form some idea of how each works and which would or could probably work better. His conclusions or perception can be fact based, logic based, or just his gut feel or instincts.

Even if he feels it is just the slightest probability or possibility that the smooth crown, 8-point could perform better, he should upgrade to it if his goal is to truly reduce risk as much as possible. Another way to look at it is he knows the cap he feels is better probably won't do any worse (they all have ANSI stickers), so there is no risk there, it could just do about the same, so there is no risk there, and it might just do better so there would be reduced risk in that circumstance.

As is any upgrade, there may be an additional initial investment. Suppose the cap he feels has the potential to reduce the risk of injury requires an investment of an additional $10.00 per cap. Based on an average work year of about 220 days, that is about 4 cents a day investment in an extra margin of protection.

Wearing PPE reduces the risk of injury and/or the severity of injury when an accident occurs. Making sure you provide what you believe has the best probability or likelihood of providing the most protection reduces risk even more.
____________________________________________________________
WARNING: Any hazard analysis and risk assessment should only be done by trained, experienced safety officials.The evaluation and selection of PPE should only be done in accordance with OSHA Guidelines by trained, experienced safety officials. This blog is intended for informational purposes only. Any reference to a specific design is for reference only and is not an endorsement of any specific design or product nor a statement of suitability for any purpose. Please read this blog post "IMPORTANT NOTICE" dated February 8, 2011 for addition warnings and disclaimers.