How important is eye protection to you?

[The Legacy]

Great thread. I'm someone who's using a friend's pair that I bought from him a year or so ago. He told me that they're ANSI rated, and so far I've had no problems. More importantly, though, is that they don't fog; I have a HUGE problem with fogging, and to find goggles that didn't fog is a wonderful thing. However, it's pretty worn out, so I'm a bit overdue in getting some new ones. Hopefully I'll find something reasonable.

I saw some people mention about using Mesh. I know that most events ban their use, but is it true that Mesh can stop all BB's? If so, why don't they make special plastic shields just under the mesh designed to protect against shrapnel? (Of course if fogging is still a thing, then I see the point)

[ThunderCactus]

Yep, you answered your own question there. Only solid lens protects against shrapnel, and only ballistic rated lenses are allowed, so no need for the added protection of the mesh.
Follow the indicators carefully:
>*Bent wire*< mesh WILL stop all *SOLID* BBs.

If BB's shatter, which heavy bio and low quality ammo are prone to doing, then they may shrapnel through.

"Punched", "flat", or "lasered" mesh, is made from a flat piece of metal. It's the flat mesh with the million round holes in it. It's SIGNIFICANTLY prone to breaking on impact since there's very little strength to the structure to begin with, and it's very often made of aluminum, or some other low tensile strength material. Without taking 2 paragraphs to explain it, just take my word that it's super easy to puncture due to material type and design.

Bent wire mesh is typically made from steel wire, and because of it's interweaving structure, is highly resistant to impact and can also absorb a lot of impact since it's made of higher tensile strength material.

The issue is more about BBs breaking up than ballistic protection, but BB's WILL SHOOT THROUGH FLAT MESH.

[Ricochet]

Mesh also dumbs down your vision I find.

[Drakker]

Originally Posted by Ricochet

Mesh also dumbs down your vision I find.

It depends, when you have perfect vision its fine. I am slightly myopic, without my contact lens, I can't see crap through mesh, when I put them on, suddenly everything is clear and it feels like wearing sunglasses.

[ThunderCactus]

Edited, keep an eye out for replicas.

[BattleBorn]

It's probably been said but: you only have 1 pair of eyes, how valuable is your sight?

I would highly stress investing money in a top pair of ballistic goggles/glasses etc. Hell, I'm running Oakley M-Frame 3.0's and Revision desert locusts when I need a full seal! I like seeing stuff, hell porn would get kinda boring with just noise... imagine focusing on the wrong person's moan?

:banghead:

[ThunderCactus]

Couple changes, grammar, reworded a few things, added a bit at the end

[lurkingknight]

z87.1 BASE old standard.

high velocity test is .25 inch steel ball at 150 fps.

z87.1 2010

the classification was reorganized into sub categories in a 2010 revision of the safety standard.
Eye Protection Marking

ANSI Z87.1-2010 requires markings on eye protection that directly relate to the ability of the eye protection device to defend against specific hazards. If the eye protection is Z87.1 compliant, it will be marked with "Z87."

Additional marking are divided into three categories:

Impact vs. Non-Impact
Splash and Dust Protection
Optical Radiation Protection
Impact vs. Non-Impact

ANSI Z87.1–2010 classifies eye protection as either impact or non-impact rated. Impact rated eye protection must meet specified high mass and high velocity tests, and provide continuous lateral coverage. Impact rated eye protection will have a plus symbol (+).

Z87+ impacted rated flat lenses
Z87-2+ impact rated prescription lens
Z87 non-impact rated flat lenses
Z87-2 non-impacted rated prescription lens


http://www.graphicproducts.com/artic...protection.php

so according to the 2010 revision of the standard, basic 87.1 is no longer rated for impact safety. You MUST purchase z87.1+ glasses.

[ThunderCactus]

updated with CSA Z94.3

[docholiday]

ThunderCactus, good job putting this together.

I think MIL-DTL-43511D has been replaced by MIL-PRF-32432.

From Revision product description for the Desert Locust:

EXCEEDS U.S. MILITARY BALLISTIC IMPACT REQUIREMENTS FOR GOGGLES (MIL-PRF-32432, CLAUSE 4.4.3.3.5, SUPERSEDING FORMER MIL-DTL-43511D, CLAUSE 3.5.10)
EXCEEDS ANSI Z87.1-2010 BALLISTIC IMPACT AND OPTICAL REQUIREMENTS

http://www.revisionmilitary.com/prod...goggle-system/



U.S. MILITARY BALLISTIC IMPACT REQUIREMENTS FOR GOGGLES MIL-PRF-32432, CLAUSE 4.4.3.3.5 as outlined below:

4.4.3.3.5 Ballistic fragmentation protection, Class 2 and Class 3. Class 2 Goggles shall be hit three (3) times with a 0.22 caliber, 17 (+/- 0.5) grain, T37 shaped projectile at 550-560 ft./sec, once on the left side and once on the right with both impacts at normal incidence (0 degree obliquity) to the primary lens at a location within the critical area. The third shot shall be in the center at the vertical center line at normal incidence (0 degree obliquity) to the primary lens. Class 3 shall be impacted in the same manner, with the exception that the center shot shall not be taken. The critical area is defined as a circle having a 20 mm radius centered on the horizontal centerline and 32 mm from the vertical centerline). A shot shall be considered valid if the projectile hits within the critical area or within 10 mm of the designated impact point, if the velocity requirements have been met for the shot (i.e., considered “fair” per paragraph 4.4.3.3.2), if obliquity requirements have been met for the shot, if the impact location is at least two projectile diameters (1.09 cm) away from the edge of a lens, and the projectile does not impact the frame. Projectiles shall be a fragment simulating project (FSP) of shape and dimensions as specified in Figure 4 and shall be manufactured from cold rolled, annealed steel conforming to composition 4340H; the projectile hardness shall be Rockwell C30 (+/-2).
Projectiles will be visually inspected for damage in between each shot. Projectiles may be reused after they have been fired unless visual observation indicates that the projectile has been damaged or deformed. The test item shall be mounted on an EN head form (small or medium) in the as-worn position. Compressed gas propulsion (N2 or He) of the projectile may be used. The test item shall be removed after each impact for inspection of both the sample and the witness sheet and any other observations noted. Damage to the witness sheet or eyewear and all observations (i.e. breakage, cracks, complete dislodgement, partial dislodgement, delamination, flaking, etc.) shall be noted. Ballistic fragmentation testing shall be conducted on a sample size of ten (10) for each configuration tested initially, and a sample size of three (3) for each post exposure (such as post chemical and post environmental). The test shall be considered a failure if one or more of the following occur:
1) if the witness sheet is perforated or if there is a complete penetration of the test item, 2) if the primary lens is cracked, fractured, or shattered,
3) if one or more fragments become dislodged on the inside of the eyewear (to include coatings)
4) if eyewear component needed to retain the eyewear on the head becomes completely separated from the eyewear
5) if the primary lens becomes completely separated from the eyewear
6) if the eyewear falls off the head form
7) if the inside laminate is cracked and results in a loose flap of material larger than the diameter of the projectile (for laminated lens structures only)
A lens crack is defined as a fissure that propagates beyond the impact site from one surface of the lens to the other. Petalling is not considered a crack.

http://everyspec.com/MIL-PRF/MIL-PRF...F-32432_45247/

[lurkingknight]

http://www.elvex.com/Facts-What-chan...Z87.1-2010.htm

TC, point of concern for 87.1+...

What do shooting glasses and shop safety glasses fall under, spectacles, goggles of face shields? cause if they're spectacles, that's only 344fps with a .2.

They're definitely not classified as a face shield, they do not cover your entire face.

[ThunderCactus]

docholiday, good info, it's been added

lurkingkknight, that's actually quite alarming. I just checked the actual spec to make sure, and it seems to ME that they've lowered the bar substantially.

The new high impact testing (the + mark) has new minimum requirements:
FACE SHIELD: ~4.08j
GOGGLES: ~2.84j
GLASSES: ~1.02j
Now only requires 6 strikes instead of the original 20

Here is the document I looked at
http://support.automationdirect.com/...NSI%20spec.pdf
page 19 (p12 of the document)

6.2.3 High Velocity Impact
When tested in accordance with Section 9.12, the
complete device shall be capable of resisting im-
pact from a 6.35 mm (0.25 in) diameter steel ball
traveling at the velocity specified in Table 5. No
contact with the eye of the headform is permitted
as a result of impact.
Table 5.
High Velocity Impact Testing
Device type Velocity
Welding helmets 45.72 m/s (150 ft/s)
Spectacles 45.72 m/s (150 ft/s)
Goggles 76.20 m/s (250 ft/s)
Faceshields 91.44 m/s (300 ft/s)

So far as I can tell, this means Z87.1+ in the case of "ballistic glasses", no longer meets the minimum requirements of airsoft use.
Just so everyone doesn't freak out immediately, the minimum THICKNESS of the glasses (2.0mm) has not changed since the 2003 requirement of ~3j, but you'll no longer be covered if they break under airsoft use....

I'd like someone else to look up a different document, verify the result, and report back here before I make a "sky is falling" thread on safety glasses.

[lurkingknight]

here are the numbers translated so airsofters can understand a bit easier:

686 FPS with a .2 for face shields
572 FPS with a .2 for goggles
344 FPS with a .2 for spectacles

I calculated these numbers basing a 1/4 inch steel ball weighing 1.046 g.

It looks like your numbers are from a slightly more dense steel, I found several charts listing several different types of steel ball bearings, ranging from from 1.046 to slightly more, so we can assume they'll all reside in and around these numbers.

The difference in steel densities is irrelevant in this case, 2 are well above fielded output, and the one that is in contention is well below what is required for airsoft.


The concern is real, people could be betting on semantics in terms of how their eye pro is classified as a goggle or spectacle, and whether or not their particular eye pro was 87.1.2003 certified vs 87.1.2010 certified, most of the time it's never marked, it's just marked as 87.1 or 87.1+.

[ThunderCactus]

math I've used
1/4 steel ball
avg weight of steel being 7.8g/cm3
6.35mm/2=3.175
(that's pi, not a crazy n) 4πr=126.68mm3
126.68mm3=.126cm3
7.8/.126=.982g
.982@150fps=1.02j

So they seem to have dropped the high impact requirement for glasses altogether, since Z87.1 alone is 1j

aaaaan re-edited a bunch of numbers because I was using the high end of steel weight instead of the average. Dropped everything .1-.2j

[lurkingknight]

mass of steel I used for calculation was http://steelmedia.com/steel-balls-data.htm

1.046 kg per 1000 balls. so 1.046 g where m is represented as a decimal of 1 kg.

=0.5*(0.001046*(45.74*45.74))

This leaves us with 1.09 J

edit:

this formula calculates the KE for a 1/4 inch steel ball traveling at 150 fps.