Reach Out — For a Better Abrasion Test

Abrasion resistance is a measure of a product’s material durability.

In the glove world, we actually have a test that’s meant to tell users, safety managers, procurement leads, and the people doing the work, how tough a glove really is. 

Unfortunately, it’s a combination of outdated jargon and confusion.

As I mentioned in last week’s newsletter on cut resistance, there are two globally accepted test methods used to measure hand protection.

But unlike cut testing - where the U.S. and European systems at least sound like they’re speaking the same language (heck, they’re using the same machine…sometimes) - abrasion testing lives on two completely different planets.

If ANSI vs. EN cut testing is a matter of dialects, abrasion testing is more like comparing the Aramaic language with Python code.

Apples and oranges? Try apples and lawnmowers.

Before we break down the tests, though, let’s talk about…

Durability

Durability is the capacity to withstand.  

It’s what separates novelty from reliability, flash-in-the-pan from staying power, or as Chris Rock would put it, Riches from Wealth.

You might think of your grandfather’s old winter work coat that is still hanging in the back of the basement closet. Or maybe Cal Ripken Jr., whose ironman streak of 2,632 consecutive games is still untouched.

When I think of durability, I think of The Four Tops.

That’s right, the Motown legends. Levi Stubbs, "Duke" Fakir, "Obie" Benson, and Lawrence Payton.

They didn’t set out to be icons.  

They didn’t even set out to be the Four Tops!

Originally called The Four Aims, the name was too close to another quartet act at the time, the Ames Brothers, so the Detroit group changed it to avoid confusion.

In the early years, they grinded.  Private parties.  Supper clubs.  No press.  Not much money.  Just hustle.  Record labels came and went, but no hits.

Ten years passed before they landed a contract with Berry Gordy at Motown.

And even then, they showed signs of longevity.  Gordy, following his Motown formula, suggested re-naming the act to “Levi Stubbs & The Four Tops.”  The group turned him down flat.

So the name held. Same lineup from 1953 to 1997.  No breakups.  No public fights. No tell-all memoirs. Just harmony with music and each other.

When Payton passed away in ‘97, they briefly performed as “The Tops,” but it was a trio and it didn’t feel right.  They recruited Theo Peoples from The Temptations to bring the sound back into balance. The music continued.

Duke Fakir, the final surviving original member, passed away last summer.  And yet The Four Tops are still touring.  New voices, but the same rhythm. They’ve played over 10,000 shows. 

You can even catch them next week near Traverse City!

The members have changed. The commitment hasn’t.

Seventy years.  That’s durability.

The Hatfields and McCoys of Abrasion Testing

When it comes to the measurement of durability, of abrasion, the standards world has given us two proud families, each convinced they’re right.

Meet the Martindales and the Tabers.

EN388 (Europe) uses the Martindale method, borrowed from textile testing.

It’s a rotary abrasion system.  A circular swatch of glove material is pressed against 180-grit sandpaper laid flat on a testing table. The defined pressure applied is – are you sitting down? – 9 kilopascals. You remember that metric from school, right?

The material is rubbed in a figure-8-like Lissajous motion until it breaks through.

And yes, for extra flair, some versions still refer to the applied load in kiloponds.

Because Newtons was featured in the cut-test, and we can’t have that when discussing abrasion. Just too commonplace. Plus, important people like to make serious things complicated.

Here at home, ANSI/ISEA 105 (United States) relies on the Taber method—specifically, the Rotary Platform Abraser.

In this test, a glove swatch is mounted flat on a rotating turntable.  Weighted abrasive wheels sit on top, spinning on their own axes while applying force in a criss-crossing wear pattern as the platform rotates beneath them. The cycles continue until the material wears through.

So let’s recap. Same product, same attribute trying to be measured:

• Fabric-on-flat-abrasive vs. wheels-on-flat, rotating surface

• Elegant Lissajous loops vs. abrasive wheel cross-patterns

• 9 kPa of pressure vs. direct weight in grams - sometimes 500g, sometimes 1kg

• EN Rating 1 - 4…like a restaurant. vs. ANSI Rating 0-6…zero, really guys?

Different testing methods. Different wheel motions. Different failure points.

No way to compare.

There’s no clean method to convert between the two systems.

Just confusion.

You have to wonder, who is even looking at these tests let along understanding them. In fact, why are we even attempting to test under either method?

Yet, in a global economy, safety managers and product directors must understand both.

It’s the Same Old Song

After a few breakout hits, Motown was eager to keep the Four Tops in rotation. Berry Gordy wanted another top 10 song.

The songwriting team of Lamont Dozier and the Holland brothers thought they had it.

They brought a new idea into the studio, and began playing.

However, Duke Fakir stopped the session. He looked around the room and said, “This sounds like the same old song.”

And he wasn’t wrong. The melody was nearly identical to I Can’t Help Myself (Sugar Pie Honey Bunch), their most recent hit.

This was a Holy Sh%t moment.

They decided this could work, and to let the fans in on the joke. 

They rewrote the lyrics. Tweaked a few elements of the music…barely.  They cut it in the studio on a Sunday, and by Monday night, It’s the Same Old Song was on the radio in Detroit.

A recycled melody, with a wink. 

It became one of the Four Tops’ signature songs.  The Rolling Stones even modeled the riff in Under My Thumb after it, which was released the following year.

Time for a Remix

The Four Tops took what sounded the same and turned it into something new, and better. The glove standards community could use a little of that Motown magic.

Because today, the Martindale and Taber methods are just playing the same tired riffs.

They’re are missing a hook: How gloves actually wear down in real life.

It’s time to remix the standard.

Let’s build a method that reflects how gloves fail, not in swatches or circles, but in real fieldwork.

Robotics and Standards

I’m not about to write a new standard here (although I’m more than happy to chair the committee!) However, I would like to make some suggestions for improvement, and global uniformity.

Robotics is all the range. And while Tesla might be having challenges with a robotic hand today, we know robotic dexterity will exist. If Boston Dynamics can make a robot dog can climb a flight of stairs, let’s think big and incorporate a robotic hand into the testing procedure.

(For good updates on all things futuristic and robotics, check out Riley Rosebee’s fantastic newsletter Godspeed.)

Robot Hand - So, let’s have a physical glove be worn by a robotic hand. Force can be a variable input and the robot can change the force of its grip to consistent measures.

Grip Dynamics - Since we’re in the robotic space, we can mimic real-world movement that reflect grip and drag dynamics, such as tool handles, ropes, etc.

True Surfaces - Test on actual wear surfaces: concrete, cable sheath, woodgrain, steel. These can be standardized for test uniformity.

Eliminate Patches - This method eliminates small squares of fabric and involves the entire palm side including the fingers - where most wear and tear shows up first.

Score - Let’s go with 1-10, with 1 being the lightest and 10 being the most abrasion resistant. Everyone understands that, it’s universal. Today, someone references a rating of Level 4, but what system? 

Is that a good score? What does “4” mean? Nobody knows. (And no Zeros!)

The Takeaway

Durability is a story.  One the Four Tops played better than anyone.

Their legacy hasn’t lasted this long by accident.  It lasted because they knew who they were, and when to push it to be something better.

The same goes for abrasion testing.

We need a new hit.  A global standard that’s understandable in all languages.

Something familiar, but better. Simpler, and durable.

Stay in touch 

If you enjoyed this piece, please reach out (I’ll be there), I’d love to hear from you. You can contact me at [email protected] or LinkedIn. 

Stay safe out there!