FOOT PROTECTION
For every one of us, our feet are vulnerable, and yet they support our bodies. Nevertheless we have to tackle hazardous situations every day which can easily be avoided by wearing correct safety shoes. It is therefore hardly surprising that more and more demands have been placed on foot protection over recent years.
The choice of a correct safety shoe is not simple, it has to be based on specific working conditions in which one has to deal with falling objects or, for example, chemicals, heat or cold, foodstuffs or sharp objects. It is also important to take account of the user’s specific needs.
To aid you in your choice, Vandeputte works with a number of well-known brands who have earned their place in the industry and, with our own Samurai range, we can also offer a perfect balance of price and quality in a wide variety of situations.
SAFETY SHOE 200J
Class S safety shoes protect you against falling objects with an energy value of 200 joules. Read more
OCCUPATIONAL SHOE 0 J
A work shoe does not have a reinforced toe cap and is therefore mainly used in working conditions where there is no risk of falling objects. Read more
BOOTS & WADERS
Specific work requires specific protection. Read more
FIREMENS' BOOTS
If you are a member of the firefighting team in your company, protect your feet with a sturdy pair of fire-resistant boots. Read more
ACCESSORIES
Comfort begins with proper care of your feet. Use the right cream or spray to ensure hygiene, wear wicking socks and make sure you have a suitable footbed. Read more
EN-ISO 20345 - safety shoes, code S(afety)
EN-ISO 20346 - protective shoes, code P(rotective)
EN-ISO 20347 - occupational shoes, code O(ccupational)
- Falling and obtruding objects (stubbing or perforating the foot)
- Contact with heat
- Welding splashes
- Chemical splashes
- Slipping and tripping
- Cold
- Sparks (Anti-static properties)
- Sprains
- Electricity
- High pressure
- Infection (hygiene as a result of using plastic (food))
- Magnetism (use of 100% antimagnetic shoes)
- Cutting hazard
What are the most common problems with protective footwear?
On average, 10 to 15% of people have problems with protective footwear. The problems can be divided into 3 areas:
1. Fit problems (shoe-related): studies show that around half of PPE users are wearing the wrong size shoe in terms of both length and width. This is simple to solve by having the shoes measured correctly.
2. Physical problems (body-related): excess sweating, abnormal calluses and skin complaints. Generally very personal and not usually caused by the shoes themselves. Phenomena such as age-related joint problems, muscle weakness, personal fitness and obesity also play an important part in the feeling of “wearing safety shoes”.
3. Psychological complaints: unfortunately we still often find that people are prejudiced against wearing safety shoes. This problem is increasingly being overcome by ensuring that new ranges of safety shoes are launched, the aesthetics of which are closer to those of ordinary street shoes.
Why should protective footwear be a crucial factor in a well-balanced PPE policy?
Thankfully the times when companies regarded safety and personal protective equipment a “necessary evil” are long gone. Yet, if we look specifically at safety shoes, health and welfare are often still handled rather cavalierly. In most cases, only one type is “imposed” on employees, and in the best case a high model and a low model.
Of course it is almost impossible to allow every employee to choose their own safety shoes. Moreover the range of safety shoes is so wide that it is likely that not everyone will have the "knowledge" to judge whether the chosen safety shoes meet the correct safety requirements and standards, taking account of the risks highlighted by the risk inventory and evaluation.
Fortunately, we have recently seen in PPE policy that trends are slowly shifting towards the individual... In addition to safety, welfare and ergonomics are becoming increasingly important in companies’ PPE policy and safety shoes can bring significant added value. More and more companies are allowing all their employees to be measured for safety shoes or are making a range of fits available.
After all, feet are the foundation of the “movement apparatus” and consequently it is not an unnecessary luxury to give your employees a well-fitting shoe, with or without adjustments. This can often resolve the necessary physical problems which go further than the typical foot complaints, such as lower back complaints and shoulder, neck, hip and knee problems. These types of complaint often result in time off work with all the associated costs.
Is it possible that I might suddenly need a different shoe size if I swap from shoes with old technology (metal anti-perforation soles and metal toe caps) to shoes with new technology (Kevlar anti-perforation soles and plastic toe caps)?
Yes, indeed. The explanation mainly lies in the width of the last. There is a trend among manufacturers to launch new shoes, usually equipped with new technology, immediately in/on a wider last.
Users with a “rather wider foot” who previously ordered a slightly larger size to gain a little more room “suddenly” no longer need to do this. Another observation is that “new technology” shoes are often a little longer than a similar shoe made with old technology. This can mainly be explained by the plastic toe cap which is designed to be more solid, or "thicker", than its steel equivalent to offer the same mechanical strength.
However, if you measure the “interior distance” between the heel and the protective toe cap, they are identical.
What is an arch support and what is it used for?
The arch support is incorporated into the sole to prevent the shoe sagging at the transition of the running surface (under the ball of the foot) and the heel; the issue is to ensure that the shoe bends at the right place, with all the ergonomic benefits that brings.
The decision whether or not to fit an arch support, and the type of material (lightweight materials such as wood or a cheap plastic) determine the cost price in the production process to the extent that some manufacturers even omit the arch support altogether. In the latter case, the shoe is left to bend at an arbitrary point which can have a very negative impact on the finish.
Better quality shoes generally have a solid arch support, often made of steel or high-quality plastic, which has sometimes been incorporated into the footbed.
What are the main differences between safety shoes, protective shoes and work shoes?
Safety shoes, protective shoes and work shoes all fall into category II and comply with the standards EN (ISO 20)345, EN (ISO 20)346 and EN (ISO 20)347 respectively. Fire-resistant shoes and shoes that protect against extreme cold, however, fall into safety category III.
Safety shoes always have a reinforced toe cap to protect against 200 J and the basic requirements, protective shoes also have a reinforced toe cap but only to 100 J whilst work shoes do not have a reinforced toe cap. S (safety), P (protective) and O (work) shoes are divided in the same way (see the example of S shoes below).
What, in a nutshell, is the difference between an SB, S1, S1P, S2, S3?
First we should define the S which they all have in common. The S is an abbreviation for “safety” and implies that these shoes should meet the standard for safety shoes. The standard for this is EN-ISO (20)345.
Among other things, this specifies that shoes should have a protective toe cap providing protection against mechanical damage to the forefoot. This means that the forefoot must not suffer any damage in the event of an impact of 200 joules. Within the standard there are then various categories which are explained briefly below:
SB: safety shoes for professional use with a protective toe cap that has been tested for an impact of 200 joules.
S1: as SB + anti-static properties + energy-absorbing heel + closed heel.
S1P: as S1 + anti-perforation midsole
S2: as S1 + water-resistant and water-absorbent upper material
S3: as S2 + anti-perforation midsole and profiled sole.
For protective shoes EN ISO (20)346 and work shoes EN ISO (20)347 this is almost the same, the main difference being the protective toe cap parameter. This only needs to provide impact protection in protective shoes and is non-existent in work shoes.
A 200 joule impact – what sort of impact should I imagine?
The joule is the international unit of energy. In the test for safety shoes, this value is equivalent to the amount of energy generated by a sharp object weighing 20 kilos falling from a height of 1 metre.
In even more tangible terms, imagine you were to lift two crates of 6 1.5-litre bottles of cola and they were suddenly to slip from your hands and fall onto your big toe…
Does a Kevlar anti-perforation sole provide just as much protection as its metal equivalent?
Absolutely! Safety shoes compliant with EN ISO (20)345 and EN ISO (20)346 in S1P/P1P or S3/P3 models are designed with an anti-perforation midsole. Whether they are made of metal or Kevlar, they are subject to exactly the same tests.
What are the benefits and drawbacks of a Kevlar anti-perforation sole?
Benefits:
• soft and extremely flexible: fits the foot better, ergonomic, less tiring for the feet
• its extreme malleability increases contact with the floor surface, less risk of slipping and sliding.
• protects the entire sole surface since it is sewn to the upper, whilst the metal equivalent is “inserted” during the production process which results in a minimal coverage of 85% of the foot surface (instead of 100%).
• does not conduct heat or cold
• not magnetic, no traceability by a metal detector.
• rust-proof, chemically neutral, does not wear
Neutral:
• arguments such as “lightweight” are prone to debate since the real saving is 10 grams at best and probably imperceptible to the user.
Drawbacks:
The Kevlar sole is generally more expensive but the benefits outweigh the difference in cost price. Manufacturers also generally integrate new technology into their “latest models” which are generally made on a somewhat broader last (i.e. “more material”) and also have other extra features which of course also contribute to the total cost price level.
Does a plastic protective toe cap offer the same protection as its metal equivalent?
Absolutely, since both meet the same standard, namely EN 12568, part of EN 20345. This is hardly surprising when you consider that metal bumpers are now only found on classic cars.
Numerous alternatives are also appearing in safety footwear, and with good reason.
Although steel toe caps did their job for years, there are still various properties that a metal toe cap does not possess. The main advantage of a plastic toe cap is the elasticity of the raw material which creates a sort of “memory effect”.
This is an important safety issue: the foot is not trapped and is “released” even when the shoe has experienced an extreme impact. Despite this beneficial effect, we should stress that safety shoes need to be replaced after suffering an impact!
What are the benefits and drawbacks of a plastic protective toe cap?
Benefits:
• The main advantage of a plastic toe cap is the elasticity of the raw material which creates a sort of “memory effect”. This is an important safety issue: the foot is not trapped and is “released” even when the shoe has experienced an extreme impact.
• Less likely to get “cold feet” after several hours working in a cold environment.
• Not magnetic, no traceability by a metal detector.
Neutral:
• arguments such as “lightweight” are prone to debate since the net saving is 10 to 20 grams at best and probably imperceptible to the user.
Drawbacks:
. Since you need more material to make a plastic toe cap providing the same (or better) mechanical strength, this also results in a somewhat “plumper” toe cap, which is not always as aesthetically pleasing. As a result, the shoe can easily be a cm longer which can raise doubts about the accuracy of the specified size, with a negative impact on the total weight (although the saving in the plastic protective toe cap largely offsets this).
• A non-metal toe cap is generally also slightly more expensive than its metal equivalent.
What are the optional features for safety/protective/work shoes?
Aside from the S/P/O-B, S/P/O-1, S/P/O-2, S/P/O-3 classifications, there is a list of optional technical specifications. We will briefly summarise the main ones:
P: Impenetrable midsole (standard above S3)
A: Anti-static properties
C: Conductive properties
HI: Heat insulation
CI: Cold insulation
E: Energy-absorbing heel
WRU: Water-resistant uppers (only applicable to leather shoes)
HRO: Heat-resistant sole (normally a nitrile sole)
What is the difference between a cement-construction and a Strobel-construction shoe?
With the cement method, the pre-formed insole is secured to the last and the lining and upper are then pulled over the last. They are cemented to the bottom of the insole and nailed to the heel part.
An advantage of cement construction is that the shoe is very solid and strong and is also very comfortable. A disadvantage is that the finish of the shoe is stiffer.
In Strobel construction, the lining and upper are sewn to the insole. The insole must be at least 2 mm thick with this method. The outer sole is usually injected.
An advantage of this method is that production can be completed very quickly and the shoe feels flexible. A disadvantage is that the leather is more easily pulled out.
What properties must I consider if I need a shoe to work in ATEX environments?
Controlling undesired electrostatic charges is assuming an increasingly important role in various industries. More and more employees are coming into contact with processes, materials or objects that are sensitive to electrostatic charges. It is therefore often necessary to use shoes as one way of conducting these electrostatic charges.
Are there also orthopaedic safety shoes?
Figures show that 15% of all wearers need an individual adjustment to their safety shoes. The group with physical problems often needs an adjustment to their street shoes but is unaware that this adjustment will only work if all shoes have the adjustment, i.e. including safety shoes.
According to the EN, no changes may be made to PPE once it has been certified. However, if a wearer is having trouble with his shoes, the situation only becomes more unsafe due, for example, to tiredness and the associated loss of concentration. There are some companies that can adjust safety shoes according to the applicable standard and can, if necessary, supply custom shoes made under the EN.
These companies are constantly developing new systems to implement adjustments to safety shoes in accordance with the EN.
What sort of materials can be used to make the upper of a shoe? What are their properties?
• Nappa leather: flexible, breathable, water-resistant
• Nubuck leather: flexible, breathable, water-resistant
• Suede (buckskin): flexible, unsuitable for moist conditions
• Loreca: microfibre with a water-resistant coating. Similar to the structure of leather but with many other technical advantages: washable, does not crack, lightweight.
What is the added value of a membrane (genre of Gore-Tex, Sympatex etc.)?
A moisture or climate-regulating layer of Gore-Tex or Sympatex can also be inserted between the lining and the upper. These materials ensure that sweat can escape from the shoe but liquids cannot penetrate.
How can I correctly estimate the non-slip characteristics of a shoe?
Until recently this was not as obvious and clearly defined in a European standard. This is because as long as there is no European standard, member states could impose their own national standard which resulted in different tests with different values which could not be compared with one another. Fortunately the situation has improved since 2008 with new European regulations.
A distinction is now made between SRA: slip resistance on floors with ceramic tiles with SLS; SRB: slip resistance on a steel floor with glycerol; SRC: slip resistance on both a ceramic tile floor with detergent and a steel floor with glycerol (both SRA and SRB).
There is a dual test for each of the methods: it is measured both by pulling the heel forward and by pulling the shoe forwards flat. Values are assigned based on this test. Below is a summary of the minimum required values in the standard.
Required non-slip values EN ISO 20345 / EN ISO 20346 / EN ISO 20347 + A1:2007 by area of use
Area of use Condition Shoe position Floor Lubricant Coefficient of friction
(from 0101009)
