When buying safety helmets for construction, manufacturing, utilities, mining, or other industrial applications, certification is one of the first specifications buyers should check. Two standards appear frequently in international PPE procurement: EN 397 and ANSI/ISEA Z89.1.

Although both standards address industrial head protection, they are not interchangeable. They use different classifications, testing frameworks, marking systems, and approaches to specific hazards.

For distributors, contractors, importers, and PPE procurement teams, understanding EN 397 vs ANSI Z89.1 can help prevent a common purchasing mistake: selecting a helmet based on appearance or price before confirming whether its certification matches the target market and workplace hazards.

This guide explains the main differences and the key points buyers should verify before placing an order.

What is EN 397?

EN 397 is a European standard covering industrial protective helmets. It specifies requirements for helmet design, performance, test methods, and markings for helmets used in general industrial environments.

An important change for buyers is that BS EN 397:2025 was published on September 30, 2025 and replaced the previous BS EN 397:2012+A1:2012 edition. The updated standard introduces two helmet categories: Type 1 and Type 2. See the BSI standard page for the current status.

Under EN 397:2025, Type 1 helmets provide top, or on-crown, impact protection. Type 2 helmets cover impacts to the crown as well as the side, front, and rear of the helmet. BSI’s transition guidance also states that a chinstrap is optional for Type 1 but mandatory for Type 2, with stronger retention requirements.

This is particularly relevant for buyers sourcing helmets for construction, industrial maintenance, work at height, mining, shipping, and other environments where head impacts may not come only from directly above.

What is ANSI/ISEA Z89.1?

ANSI/ISEA Z89.1 is the primary American national consensus standard for industrial head protection. As of August 2026, ISEA continues to list ANSI/ISEA Z89.1-2014 (R2019) as the published standard while a revision is in progress.

The standard establishes performance and testing requirements for industrial helmets and classifies head protection by both impact type και electrical protection class. See the ISEA Head Protection resource for the current standard listing and classifications.

ANSI Type I helmets are designed for top protection. ANSI Type II helmets include lateral-impact performance requirements addressing impacts from the front, back, and sides as well as the top, together with off-center penetration requirements.

ANSI/ISEA Z89.1 also uses electrical Classes G, E, and C. ISEA states that Class G helmets are tested at 2,200 volts, Class E helmets are tested to withstand 20,000 volts, and Class C helmets provide no electrical protection.

EN 397 vs ANSI Z89.1: Key differences

The main lesson is that similar labels such as “Type 1/Type I” and “Type 2/Type II” do not make the two standards equivalent. A helmet meeting ANSI Type II requirements does not automatically become an EN 397 Type 2 helmet, and an EN 397-certified helmet does not automatically satisfy ANSI Z89.1 requirements.

Buyers should request certification or test documentation for the exact standard, edition, helmet model, and claimed performance required by the destination market.

One major change buyers should know about EN 397:2025

Many older guides still describe EN 397 using the requirements of EN 397:2012+A1:2012. That information can now be incomplete for new procurement decisions.

One of the most important changes in the 2025 revision is the introduction of Type 1 and Type 2 industrial protective helmets. According to BSI transition guidance, Type 1 helmets are tested with 49 J of top-impact energy. Type 2 helmets are tested with 98 J on-crown impact energy and 24.5 J for off-crown impacts, covering the side, front, and rear.

The revision also strengthens areas such as compatibility with other PPE, test methodology, electrostatic requirements, and visibility-related provisions. BSI provides a detailed EN 397:2025 transition overview for manufacturers and buyers.

For procurement teams, simply asking a supplier, “Do you have EN 397?” may no longer be enough. You should also confirm which edition, helmet type, certificate, and optional performance claims apply to the specific model you are purchasing.

Electrical protection: A major difference

Electrical protection is one of the areas where buyers need to be especially careful.

ANSI/ISEA Z89.1 provides a clear electrical classification system. Class G is tested at 2,200 volts. Class E is tested to withstand 20,000 volts. Class C provides no electrical protection.

The European approach is different under EN 397:2025. BSI’s transition guidance states that the former 440 V AC electrical insulation option has been removed from EN 397:2025. For electrically insulating helmets intended for live electrical work, buyers should look to the relevant EN 50365 requirements instead.

This distinction matters when purchasing helmets for power utilities, electrical contractors, substations, industrial maintenance teams, and other workplaces involving energized equipment. Never assume that a plastic helmet is electrically rated simply because its shell is non-metallic. The certification and electrical rating must match the actual hazard.

ANSI Type I vs Type II: Which helmet should you buy?

For many U.S. buyers, one of the first decisions is whether a project requires an ANSI Type I or Type II helmet.

Type I helmets focus on top-impact protection. They are commonly selected for workplaces where the primary head hazard is an object striking the crown of the helmet.

Type II helmets address a broader set of impact directions. ISEA states that Type II performance requirements include impact energy attenuation from the front, back, sides, and top, as well as off-center penetration resistance.

A Type II helmet may therefore be appropriate where workers could strike structural members, equipment, scaffolding, machinery, or the ground. However, “Type II” should not automatically be interpreted as “the correct helmet for every worker.” Selection should start with a documented hazard assessment.

What buyers should know about chinstraps under ANSI Z89.1

Chinstrap requirements are often oversimplified in online comparisons. ANSI/ISEA Z89.1 does not universally require a chinstrap for all industrial helmets.

ISEA explains that if Type II head protection includes a chinstrap, the chinstrap is subject to specified width, elongation, and retention testing requirements. See ISEA’s head protection facts guide for this clarification.

This is different from EN 397:2025 Type 2, for which BSI’s transition guidance identifies the chinstrap as mandatory. Buyers should therefore compare the actual standard requirements rather than assuming that similar helmet styles have the same retention rules.

EN 397 Type 1 vs Type 2: What has changed?

The new EN 397 classification creates a similar high-level purchasing question for European-market buyers.

EN 397:2025 Type 1 is intended for top-impact protection, while Type 2 extends protection to off-crown impacts involving the side, front, and rear. BSI also identifies a mandatory chinstrap and stronger retention requirements for Type 2 helmets.

For procurement, the practical question is no longer simply “EN 397 or not?” It is increasingly: What impact directions does the risk assessment identify, and which EN 397 helmet type is appropriate for those hazards?

Does an EN 397 helmet meet ANSI Z89.1?

Not automatically.

EN 397 and ANSI/ISEA Z89.1 are separate standards. Even when two helmets look nearly identical or provide similar forms of protection, compliance with one standard does not by itself demonstrate compliance with the other.

This is especially important for importers purchasing one helmet design for several markets. If you intend to sell or use the same model in both Europe and the United States, ask the manufacturer whether that exact model has been assessed against both applicable standards. Do not rely only on a supplier’s general company certification or on certification obtained for another helmet in the same product family.

Does ANSI Z89.1 matter for OSHA compliance?

Yes, but buyers should understand the relationship correctly.

OSHA’s general-industry head protection rule, 29 CFR 1910.135, requires protective helmets where workers face specified head hazards and identifies ANSI Z89.1 editions as consensus standards. OSHA also allows head protection that an employer can demonstrate is at least as effective as equipment constructed in accordance with the referenced standards.

For U.S. procurement, this is one reason accurate ANSI markings and supporting documentation matter. Buyers should not treat vague phrases such as “OSHA approved” as a substitute for a clearly identified helmet standard and verifiable compliance documentation.

How should buyers choose between EN 397 and ANSI Z89.1?

The answer usually depends first on where the helmet will be sold or used.

For European projects, specifications may require EN-compliant head protection and the applicable conformity documentation. For U.S. workplaces, ANSI/ISEA Z89.1 is the central industrial head-protection standard used in many procurement specifications and safety programs.

For international distributors, a practical sourcing strategy is to work with a supplier that can clearly identify which helmet models are intended for which standards and can provide model-specific documentation for the target markets.

What to check before ordering safety helmets in bulk

Certification should be the starting point, not the end of the purchasing process. Before approving a bulk order, check the following:

• Exact standard and edition claimed for the model
• Helmet type or impact classification
• Electrical class or separate electrical-insulation standard, when applicable
• Shell material and suspension design
• Chinstrap configuration and retention requirements
• Size adjustment system and wearer fit range
• Compatibility with visors, earmuffs, face shields, or other PPE
• Ventilation and environmental suitability
• Product markings and manufacturing information
• Certificate scope, test reports, and model traceability
• Color, logo, packaging, and other OEM requirements

The most important point is traceability. The model number shown on the quotation, product specification, helmet marking, test report, and certificate should correspond correctly. This becomes especially important for OEM or private-label orders because certification for one model does not automatically cover every shell, suspension, accessory, or customized configuration.

Choosing a safety helmet supplier for international markets

For distributors and importers, compliance capability should be evaluated together with manufacturing capability. A suitable supplier should be able to explain which helmet models are intended for which standards and markets and provide the corresponding documentation for buyer verification.

Toprise states that it manufactures and supplies a range of industrial safety helmets and hard hats, supports customized logos and packaging, and offers models marketed for CE- and ANSI-related requirements. Buyers should still confirm the exact certification applicable to the individual model before ordering. You can explore Toprise’s safety helmets and hard hats to compare available designs and discuss certification, shell material, suspension systems, branding, and order requirements.

EN 397 or ANSI Z89.1: Which is better?

Neither standard should be described simply as “better.” They were developed for different regulatory and market environments, and the correct choice depends on the hazards workers face and the requirements applicable to the destination market.

For a European construction project, an ANSI label alone may not satisfy the purchasing specification. For a U.S. industrial project, an EN 397 marking alone should not be assumed to meet the required ANSI criteria.

For global PPE buyers, the more useful question is: Which standard, helmet type, electrical rating, retention system, and certification package does my application require? Once those requirements are clear, comparing suppliers becomes much easier.

FAQ: EN 397 vs ANSI Z89.1

What is the main difference between EN 397 and ANSI Z89.1?

EN 397 is a European industrial protective helmet standard, while ANSI/ISEA Z89.1 is an American industrial head-protection standard. They use different test requirements, classifications, markings, and conformity frameworks.

Is EN 397:2025 different from the old EN 397 standard?

Yes. EN 397:2025 replaces the previous BS EN 397:2012+A1:2012 edition and introduces Type 1 and Type 2 helmet classifications, along with changes to testing and performance requirements.

What is an ANSI Type I safety helmet?

An ANSI Type I helmet is designed for top-impact protection.

What is an ANSI Type II safety helmet?

ANSI Type II helmets include lateral-impact performance requirements addressing the front, rear, sides, and top of the helmet, together with off-center penetration requirements.

Does ANSI Type II require a chinstrap?

ANSI/ISEA Z89.1 does not universally require a chinstrap. ISEA states that when Type II head protection includes a chinstrap, the strap is subject to retention-related requirements.

What do ANSI Class G, E, and C mean?

They identify electrical protection classifications. Class G is tested at 2,200 volts, Class E is tested to withstand 20,000 volts, and Class C provides no electrical protection.

Can one safety helmet comply with both EN 397 and ANSI Z89.1?

A helmet may be assessed against multiple standards, but compliance with one does not automatically establish compliance with another. Buyers should request documentation covering the exact helmet model and every standard claimed.

Where can I source EN and ANSI safety helmets?

International buyers can review Toprise safety helmet options and contact the manufacturer to confirm the applicable certification, helmet type, materials, OEM requirements, and order quantity before purchasing.