Publisher of leading trade magazines for the Footwear, Leather-goods, Leather & PPE industries

Buyer beware: You cannot take claimed standards at face value

Published: 30th Jan 2017
Author: Anette Thompson; Footwear Programme Administration; Podiatry Association of South Africa

Port Elizabeth podiatrists Stuart Alexander and Maxine Wilson have alerted the Podiatry Association of SA’s Footwear Committee to an example of safety footwear which can cause foot pathologies and that companies are still buying as PPE.

I honestly doubt that this boot would have passed testing for ISO SANS 20345 for the reasons given below.
I obscured the brand – however, my intention is that I don’t really want to go after one brand because there are many – this is a syndrome in which buyers seem to be unable to judge the quality/foot damage potential of footwear and my intention is an educational one. 
I have put together the following information which I would be grateful that you publish in the interests of educating the buyers out there as to what characteristics NOT to buy…– [+27 (0)31 201 9907, anette.thompson@telmo.co.za]
 
 

ASSESSMENT OF SAFETY FOOTWEAR IMPLICATED IN FOOT PATHOLOGY IN PORT ELIZABETH

 
A = EVA padding (above ankle and wrap around the upper foot) is closed cell foam which is good insulation but no breathability.
B = 1mm EVA lining laminated to the leather which adds insulation but no breathability.
C = Lining showing premature wear so it will not pass wet and dry abrasion test.
D = Topsock is a 1.5mm EVA with fibre cover, no cushioning and again no breathability.
E = Heel filler made of a solid high density plug instead of lower density plug which would cushion the heel bone.
F = 1mm Stroebel sock has minimal moisture absorption.
G = Midsole density under the ball of the foot is thinner (?) than further ahead under the toes (H); this should be the other way around to give more cushioning under the metatarsal joints.
I = Label bears a CE and EN20345 code but where is the authenticity of the lab report to substantiate this? (given that there are so many irregularities in this shoe).
J = Tongue foam is open cell which is good for breathability but …
K = The tongue material is PU which is non breathable.
L = Split leather is 1.2mm  - which is not to spec – specification is 2 to 2.2mm.
M = 1mm EVA lining is already de-laminating at this early stage of use.
N = 604 steel toecap is acceptable, although on the narrow side.
CONCLUSION:  This is sub-spec and has thermal properties suitable for a cold climate. 
 

Related Articles

 

Footwear Industry Articles

Leather Industry Articles

PPE Industry Articles

© S&V Publications
×
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Learn more
Accept
Untitled Document