Prescription safety glasses

[Rhossydd]

Being of an age where reading glasses are needed for close work, I'm thinking of investing in some prescription safety glasses for use in the workshop.
I've tried the 3M glasses with bifocal 'reader' magnification which are useful, but really not ideal.

Anyone had a set of Infield glasses made up ? http://www.safetyspecs.co.uk/Infield%20 ... lasses.htm
They look to be affordable and practical.

Any other options I ought to look at ?

TIA

Paul

 

[Myfordman]

Try the many online suppliers of normal specs. They may well also offer safety variants

 

[RossJarvis]

Any other options I ought to look at ?

TIA

Paul

I got these at Specsavers;



They do the trick, aren't particularly "clunky", and are comfortable. You can get bigger frames. I think they were about 100 quid. The lenses are kite marked.

 

[MARK.B.]

A good optician

 

[Mark Hancock]

Paul

Do make sure you have the appropriate safety glasses for the work you do. Just because they are called safety glasses doesn't mean they are the right ones for the job at hand. I came across a situation whilst teaching in a turning workshop where one of the other tutors had safety glasses which were unsuitable and wouldn't have given him the right level of protection; not advisable when dealing with complete beginners

You can check out the EN166 standard below.

http://www.greenham.com/selectionguides/eyewear.pdf

 

[custard]

What a great thread, useful info here that isn't commonly available.

Maybe this should be pinned?

 

[adzeman]

4 years ago with "specsavers" at a periodical eye test, I asked them if they would test my eyes for my reading glasses using sheet music as the test card set at a measured distance from my eyes to the music stand on the keyboard to which they agreed. The resultant specs were brilliant and fit for purpose. On the next test it was repeated with the same satisfactory results. I did ask them at the repeat test if they could do this for a pair of safety glasses? No they replied it is too specialized but under current legislation (I have not checked) you can insist your employer must provide them if required. My response was, "no good I am retired". I did buy a pair of safety glasses at the last Ally Pally Woodworking Show which are similar to those general short sighted glasses you could buy at Woolworths or Boots but not good and they did not stand up to the normal wear and tear of the workshop. I have been using the first music reading glasses from 4 years ago but cant use them now as they have become too scratched to be any benefit. The amount of punishment they get in the shop is alarming but then so do commercial safety glasses which raises the question- Are commercial safety glasses tested? If so who tests them? where can you read the results? Has Which done a report? or is the truth they are only glorified sun glasses with a lens that does not shatter? with a throw away life that look cool or trendy in the work shop? I must admit the last lot I bought from Screwfix with the LED lights attached are cool for close work in dark corners. I am due for another eye test soon and will raise these questions again. Interesting thread I will report on how I get on and look forward to other views and experiences.

 

[Rhossydd]

Do make sure you have the appropriate safety glasses for the work you do.

I have ;-) If you look at the link in my original post, all their glasses are to EN166F
I was particularly asking if anyone had any experience of this particular specialist firm, or knew of anyone similar.

You can check out the EN166 standard below.
http://www.greenham.com/selectionguides/eyewear.pdf

Very useful document that.
For woodwork the main concern for me is impact damage; The problem is working out what class protection is best for which task. F seems easy to get hold of, B seems standard on full face visors, high impact A seems rarer to see offered.
I'm curious that the protection is rated by speed of impact, rather than force/power. Surely the mass of the object hitting the glasses is important ? high speed metal dust from a grinder seems to me to need less protection than, say, a drill bit breaking off at lower speed.
Anyone seen a document that relates specific risks to these classes ? eg what rating is needed to protect against a broken router bit hitting you ?

My own approach will be to use prescription safety glasses most of the time in the workshop rather than just general reading glasses. Then add additional protection with a full face visor when doing anything I think particularly hazardous (eg turning big off balance lumps etc.). I'd expect there to be a cumulative factor when using two separate protections, so an F+B would hopefully give more protection that just the B alone.

 

[adzeman]

Thanks Paul for an informative post, I have downloaded the PDF file for future reference and I think you are right with your suggestion in using a full face visor.

Following your post I have checked the numerous safety glasses in the shop and none of them have any reference to EN166F and the last pair (by DeWalt) given free with my last Screwfix order don’t either?

 

[Mark Hancock]

Do make sure you have the appropriate safety glasses for the work you do.

I have ;-) If you look at the link in my original post, all their glasses are to EN166F.

That was my concern; F denotes low energy impact whereas B, which is the usual level required in a woodworking environment, denotes medium energy impact.

I'm curious that the protection is rated by speed of impact, rather than force/power. Surely the mass of the object hitting the glasses is important ?

Although the standard does refer to speed it also uses the term 'energy' so I think the mass has been taken into account. Maybe something to do with scalar and vector forces :?:

high speed metal dust from a grinder seems to me to need less protection than, say, a drill bit breaking off at lower speed.

For a grinder it's the sparks as well that is why when using one the protection should have the standard for molten metal i.e.9

To put all this in context the accepted standard for a face visor for woodturning is EN166 1 3 B 9 i.e. medium impact and molten metal protection.

My own approach will be to use prescription safety glasses most of the time in the workshop rather than just general reading glasses. Then add additional protection with a full face visor when doing anything I think particularly hazardous (eg turning big off balance lumps etc.). I'd expect there to be a cumulative factor when using two separate protections, so an F+B would hopefully give more protection that just the B alone.

If you read the note on the document the opposite is the advice given...."– in which case the lower level must be assigned to the complete unit when making an assessment."

 

[Rhossydd]

For a grinder it's the sparks as well that is why when using one the protection should have the standard for molten metal i.e.9
To put all this in context the accepted standard for a face visor for woodturning is EN166 1 3 B 9 i.e. medium impact and molten metal protection.

'molten metal' ? I've thought of that as having a much higher degree of mass and thermal energy eg lumps of metal splatter from welding, rather than the more dust like particles from a grinding wheel in use. (Leaving aside impact risks)

If you read the note on the document the opposite is the advice given...."– in which case the lower level must be assigned to the complete unit when making an assessment."

That's referring to the differing standards of frames and lenses. I was talking about two complete items of protection at the same time. It's difficult to see how wearing a pair of safety glasses behind a full face visor could reduce protection.

 

[Mark Hancock]

The sparks from a grinder are molten metal. I learnt this to my cost many years ago. I was wearing glasses which had light weight plastic lens. Being lazy I got in the habit of not putting my face visor on when sharpening turning tools. When I tried cleaning my glasses I felt very small grit like particles on the lens which couldn't be removed. The 'sparks' had hit the lens and embedded in the plastic. I learnt my lesson