The ANSI/ISEA 105 standard is the primary North American benchmark for evaluating glove protection against mechanical hazards. It provides performance ratings for cut, abrasion, and puncture resistance to help guide glove selection across a wide range of industrial applications.
The 2024 revision improves labeling clarity and expands the standard to include additional hazard categories and arm protection, while maintaining the same core test methods.
How to Use This Standard
ANSI performance levels help match glove protection to specific workplace hazards and applications.
- Higher levels indicate greater resistance to the tested hazard
- Lower levels generally provide increased flexibility and dexterity
The goal is to select the right level of protection for the application—not simply the highest rating available.
Cut Resistance
Cut resistance measures how well a glove protects against sharp materials and cutting hazards.
ANSI testing uses the ASTM F2992 (TDM-100) method to determine cut resistance levels by measuring the force required to cut through the glove material.
ANSI cut resistance levels range from A1–A9, with higher ratings providing greater protection against cut risks. Lower levels are commonly used for tasks requiring greater flexibility and dexterity, while higher levels are designed for more demanding applications involving sharp materials.
ANSI/ISEA 105 Cut Resistance Levels
200-499
500-999
1000-1499
1500-2199
2200-2999
3000-3999
4000-4999
5000-5999
6000
Light/Medium Cut Hazards Low risk / High dexterity
Medium/Heavy Cut Hazards Moderate risk / Balanced protection
Heavy/High Cut Hazards High risk / Maximum protection
Abrasion Resistance
Abrasion resistance measures how well a glove withstands repeated surface wear during use.
ANSI abrasion testing uses a Taber Abraser to measure how many cycles a glove material can withstand before wearing through. Testing is performed using ASTM D3389 for coated gloves and ASTM D3884 for uncoated gloves.
Higher abrasion levels indicate increased durability in high-wear environments such as construction, manufacturing, and material handling.
ANSI/ISEA 105 | |
|---|---|
500 GRAM LOAD | |
0 | < 100 Cycles |
1 | ≥ 100 Cycles |
2 | ≥ 500 Cycles |
3 | ≥ 1000 Cycles |
1000 GRAM LOAD | |
4 | ≥ 3000 Cycles |
5 | ≥ 10000 Cycles |
6 | ≥ 20000 Cycles |
Puncture Resistance
Puncture resistance measures how much force is required to puncture the glove material.
ANSI testing uses a standardized probe to measure puncture resistance levels, helping evaluate glove performance in applications involving sharp tools, metal edges, and other puncture hazards.
Higher puncture ratings provide increased protection in demanding industrial environments.
ANSI/ISEA 105 | |||
|---|---|---|---|
Light hazards | 0 | < 10 | |
1 | ≥ 10 | ||
2 | ≥ 20 | ||
Moderate hazards | 3 | ≥ 60 | |
4 | ≥ 100 | ||
High hazards | 5 | ≥ 150 | |
ANSI vs EN388 – Key Differences
ANSI/ISEA 105 and EN388 evaluate many of the same mechanical hazards, but use different rating scales, reporting units, and testing methods.
ANSI provides greater granularity in cut resistance ratings, while both standards offer reliable benchmarks for evaluating glove performance across industrial applications.
ANSI/ISEA 105 vs EN388:2016 | ||
|---|---|---|
FEATURE | ANSI/ISEA 105 | EN388 : 2016 |
Cut Scale | A1-A9 | A-F |
Units | Grams | Newtons |
Cut Test | ASTM F2992 | ISO 13997 |
Sample Size - Cut | 3 | 5 |
Puncture Test | ASTM F1342 | EN388 Puncture |
Puncture Rating | Levels 1-5 | Levels 1-4* |
Sample Size - Puncture | 12 | 4 |
* EN388 puncture ratings are offset by one level relative to ANSI/ISEA 105 | ||
Key Takeaway
ANSI and EN388 are both widely recognized standards for evaluating glove performance against mechanical hazards. While testing methods and rating systems differ, both standards provide reliable guidance for assessing cut, abrasion, and puncture resistance across industrial applications.