BUILDING SAFETY


Beyond specification: ensuring arc-rated PPE performs in practice


D


An arc flash can generate temperatures of almost 20,000°C, nearly four times hotter than the surface of the sun. For engineers maintaining electrical systems within commercial buildings, hospitals, industrial facilities and critical infrastructure, the consequences of inadequate protection can be life changing. David Ward, technical development manager at Alsico explains


espite this, research from alsico suggests that confidence in protective clothing remains surprisingly low. More than half (57%) of professionals working around live electricity


said they do not always feel protected from electrical hazards in the uniforms they wear. That finding should give organisations responsible for specifying PPE pause. It suggests that meeting the required standards isn’t always enough to give workers confidence in the protection they’re wearing. The research, which surveyed 150 professionals working with live electricity alongside more than 100 people responsible for selecting protective clothing, also found that only 40% of wearers always use every part of the protective uniform they have been issued. More than a quarter (26%) admitted to wearing their own clothing instead, while almost one in five (19%) said they had done so despite understanding the risks. Most organisations invest in arc-rated clothing because they want their people to go home safely at the end of every shift. But these findings suggest that issuing compliant PPE isn’t the end of the story.


From specification to reliable protection


Encouragingly, almost all uniform selectors surveyed (96%) agreed that worker safety should remain the highest priority when assessing protective clothing. The challenge is ensuring that the decisions made during procurement continue to deliver protection once garments reach site.


For building services engineers and facilities teams, PPE is one element of a much wider safety strategy that includes risk assessments, electrical isolation procedures, maintenance planning and safe systems of work. Protective clothing should be viewed in exactly the same way. Selecting a compliant garment is only the


beginning. Organisations also need confidence that it reflects the hazards workers will actually encounter throughout the life of a building. That means looking beyond a certification label and understanding how a garment will perform in the real environments where it’s worn.


Beyond certification


One of the biggest knowledge gaps highlighted by the research relates to arc flash performance ratings.


When selecting arc-rated clothing,


procurement professionals overwhelmingly identified protective features as their highest priority. However, only 27% specifically considered higher ELIM ratings during the purchasing process, while fewer than one in ten said ELIM directly influenced their final decision. ELIM, or Incident Energy Limit, identifies the maximum incident energy a garment can withstand with a 0% probability of enough energy passing through the fabric to cause a second-degree burn. By comparison, ATPV represents the point at which there is a 50% probability of sustaining a second-degree burn. Both ratings have an important role in understanding garment performance, but they communicate different levels of protection. The findings suggest that many organisations may still be selecting clothing according to minimum compliance requirements rather than fully considering how garments will perform in real operating environments. For those responsible for maintaining electrical infrastructure within buildings, this distinction matters. The right garment should always reflect the outcome of a site-specific risk assessment rather than a generic specification.


Understanding the layers of PPE


It’s easy to think about jackets and coveralls as the main source of protection, but arc- rated clothing works as a system. Every layer contributes to the overall level of protection. Flame-resistant base layers are one example.


Although they receive far less attention than jackets or coveralls, suitable FR undergarments can provide an additional layer of protection in the event of an arc flash. Yet they are frequently overlooked during procurement or left to individual wearers to source themselves. As organisations review their PPE strategies, it is worth considering how every element of the clothing system contributes to protection, rather than assessing garments in isolation.


Compliance starts with confidence


Most people don’t set out to ignore safety procedures. In many cases, workers are responding to the practical realities of the job, whether that’s long shifts, physically demanding tasks or clothing that doesn’t feel suited to the environment. The research found that almost half (47%)


of respondents would wear their protective clothing more consistently if it were more comfortable, while softer fabrics, greater stretch and improved fit were identified as priorities for future garments.


The industry has made significant progress in addressing these challenges. Advances in fabric development mean organisations no longer have to choose between protection and wearability in the way they once did. Modern arc-rated garments are lighter, more breathable and designed to move with the wearer while maintaining the required levels of protection. The difficulty is that these advances aren’t always reflected in procurement decisions. Although almost all employers surveyed (96%) said safety is their highest priority when selecting protective clothing, only 27% identified wearer comfort as a major influence on purchasing decisions. In other words, better options exist, but they aren’t always the ones being selected. Comfort is an important part of the picture, but it isn’t the whole story. Workers also need confidence that the clothing they’ve been issued is appropriate for the risks they face, together with a clear understanding of why particular garments have been specified.


True safety culture


The effectiveness of arc-rated PPE depends on much more than the garment itself. Regular refresher training, practical demonstrations and open discussions about arc flash hazards all help build understanding and encourage consistent use. Equally important is involving wearers in procurement decisions so organisations can identify issues affecting comfort, practicality or usability before they become barriers to compliance. Building owners and facilities managers


routinely expect fire detection systems, emergency lighting and electrical protection devices to perform exactly as intended when needed. Protective clothing deserves the same level of consideration. It should not simply satisfy a specification on paper; it should be trusted by the people relying on it every day. Providing arc-rated clothing is one thing. Making sure people understand it, trust it and wear it correctly is another. That takes collaboration between manufacturers, employers and the people wearing the garments every day. Better education, more informed specification and continued innovation all have a role to play, but ultimately protection only works when workers have confidence in what they’re wearing. When workers trust the protection they have been given and understand how it performs, compliance becomes much easier to achieve. That is ultimately how organisations create safer workplaces and ensure protective clothing delivers the protection it was designed to provide.


Read the latest at: www.bsee.co.uk BUILDING SERVICES & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER AUGUST 2026 21


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38