FIE Suspends use of Visor mask for foil and epee

[Craig]

Story on Fencing.Net home page.

[downunder]

I'm refereeing an epee world cup in Tallinn this weekend. Should be interesting.

[Zelda]

That will be interesting.

[Mihail]

The FIE doesn't care about sabre people.

[MdA]

Will the USFA allow them at the Jr Olympics this weekend?

[oiuyt]

Will the USFA allow them at the Jr Olympics this weekend?

The EC has a previously-scheduled call tonight. The status of transparent masks has been added to the agenda for that call.

-B

[oiuyt]

In addition to the FIE letter (which Craig's article links), the FIE has also made available the report from the testing lab.

-B

[Barry Paul]

This weekend following the receipt of a technical report regarding the failure of a Ulhmann transparent mask at the Junior European Championships the F.I.E. have temporarily suspended their use at its competitions for foil and epee. Leon Paul have reviewed all the technical evidence and the reports from the independent technical advisor who tested the mask that failed and two other independant experts. All of this confirms our continued belief that a mask that is made according to the FIE rules that incorporates in its design all of the features that are suggested in the FIE rules is perfectly safe provided it is used according to the manufacturer's instructions.

It is essential that the mask is:

Made with a visor made from Lexan not a generic polycarbonate.
Made with a drape formed rather than injection molded visor.
Made in such a way that the visor when inserted is not stressed or bent out of its natural shape and or the fixing mechanism cannot be over tightened. .
Made in such a way that there are no sharp edges in contact with the main visor.
Made with a coated visor to help protect it.

It is also essential that the visor has an outer layer to protect it from scratches. The use of an outer protective scratch layer is advised in the FIE rules and European standards rather than mandatory and we have said for a long time that it should be mandatory.

We stand by our product and assure all of our customers that Leon Paul visor masks include all of the features noted above.

Barry Paul M.D. Leon Paul

[downunder]

Quote from the technical report:

Main conclusion from these studies is that visor is made from an unknown PC product. The brand coding (Lexan) on this visor is therefore seriously questioned. It needs to be mentioned further that resin type of the polycarbonate is very relevant. For the manufacturing of lexan sheeted products high viscous polycarbonate resin is used. Such products will have an improved impact performance and modestly better chemical performance.


Bloody hell if i owned a Uhlmann visor mask I'd be wanting my money back asap.

[Alexander Kai]

I saw that too, and continued reading, it didn't call the brand to question again....but....... it still kind of makes me wonder.

[brtech]

Barry

The report said a few more things:

• The radius of the mask should exactly match the radius of the lexan, and in particular, different sizes of mask may need different sizes of visors
• No PVCs should be used in the mask or the carry case
• A rubber mat be used between the lexan and the metal
• the fixation should have a mechanism to prevent over-torquing it, or a torque specification should be made and observed
• Markings should not be stamped into the surface

Can you comment on those items?

[brtech]

It is interesting to me that the issues the report raises are equally applicable to saber masks as they are to foil/epee. I find no justification for not immediately suspending the use of visor masks completely. As manufactured, by at least some vendors, they are not safe.

USFA needs to stop risking fencers and not allow these masks unless and until they can be made safe in all three weapons.

[brtech]

Will the USFA allow them at the Jr Olympics this weekend?

I am head tech for this event.

Unless someone tells me otherwise, I do not think I have the power to fail them.

I can instruct armorers to advise fencers to not use them. I will do so, for all 3 weapons. I will have copies of the report available.

This is VERY scary, and reinforces the universal armorer's opinion that transparent masks are inherently unsafe because they are not testable.

[DHCJr]

Barry

The report said a few more things:

• The radius of the mask should exactly match the radius of the lexan, and in particular, different sizes of mask may need different sizes of visors
• No PVCs should be used in the mask or the carry case
• A rubber mat be used between the lexan and the metal
• the fixation should have a mechanism to prevent over-torquing it, or a torque specification should be made and observed
• Markings should not be stamped into the surface

Can you comment on those items?

That last one is interesting as how will we know how old the visor is without the date on the visor. I won't mention how will we know if it is made of Lexan if it is not marked, considering it was marked as Lexan, but it was not.

There are other issues. A mask must have a angle of <= 130 degrees, which can get pretty extreme. Think 90 degrees. But they want to visor to be as flat as possible. But they both must be the same.

They also suggested some problems might be caused by Magic Marker (Names, inspection marks), inspection stamps, glue holding down the trim, the insulation paint on Foil Masks, the covering of the tongue. As brtech said, these concerns are equal for the Sabre masks, except for the paint insulation. None of these they showed are on or touching the visor, except the paint, but with volatiles all they need to be is close.

They also suggest putting the masks in a bag. Wouldn't that concentrate the volatiles in an enclosed space.

I agree with brtech. This reinforces most Armorers feeling that visor masks are inherently unsafe, not just because they can't be tested (they used florescent light to find stress). Everything that is done to build the mask, identify the mask & visor and all the means of varifying that the mask is safe, makes it more unsafe.

[pillow]

I am head tech for this event.

Unless someone tells me otherwise, I do not think I have the power to fail them.

I can instruct armorers to advise fencers to not use them. I will do so, for all 3 weapons. I will have copies of the report available.

This is VERY scary, and reinforces the universal armorer's opinion that transparent masks are inherently unsafe because they are not testable.

It would seem that for the USFA to be on safe legal grounds, the use of visor masks must be banned for the JO's this weekend. Can you imagine what would happen if the USFA allowed the use of visors AFTER the world governing body for fencing found them to be unsafe? The safety of our fencers (basically kids) has to be number one priority. For those few fencers who have been fencing internationally with visor masks for foil for example, I bet all of them have at least one or two mesh masks in good condition.

An urgent email blast must be sent out by the USFA asap today to the entire membership.

[LordShout]

[1]- reinforce the standards imposed by the FIE Rules (i.e. make
mandatory what was recommended or optional);
[2]- establish systematic verification processes during the equipment
control;
[3]- enlarge the security standards.

They don't listen, numerous armorers and people with intensive technological degrees have said 2 is economically impossible. 1 is, based on the advice of those same people, still not going to be enough because without 2 it is useless. 3 is vague and to my mind just burecratic ass covering.

Why do they continue to insist we must have visor masks for high level fencing? Is this supposed to become Nascar?

[Barry Paul]

Brtech,

The report is written by an expert in plastics who has only slight knowledge of fencing. So in his report he has quite rightly included all the factors which might effect the posible life of a mask with a plycarbonate visor. He has made no attempt to give each factor a score.
so 1. # The radius of the mask should exactly match the radius of the lexan, and in particular, different sizes of mask may need different sizes of visors. Clearly it is not possible to get an exact size and it will depend on how close the fit of the visor is to the metal fitting. In Leon Paul mask we have two sizes.
2. No PVCs should be used in the mask or the carry case. I Think this is refering mainly to internal paddings of the mask. (Leon Paul don't use PVC linings) However 9 years experience tells us that chemical attack from such outgassing of PVC is very small especially with coated visors (which ours is.)
3.A rubber mat be used between the lexan and the metal. I think the main concern was to provide a barrier between the sharp edges of both the inside of the masks as examined and the outside fixing frame. In the case of Leon paul mask there is no contact of the fixing frame and the visor due to the presence of the outer protective scratch layer. The other benifit of a rubber seal would be to spread out shock load, on the mask examined the point is in direct contact with the visor and over a small area can produce high stress loads. The outer Leon Paul protective scratch layer prevents such point stress and any inpact is spread over a much larger area.
4. the fixation should have a mechanism to prevent over-torquing it, or a torque specification should be made and observed. In the mask tested there was no limit to high tight the nuts can be tightened. In Leon Paul masks the screws thru the retaining stainless steel strips bottom out leaving the visor floating not gripped.
6. Markings should not be stamped into the surface. Some stress is put into the suface at this point by stamping, but it is at the side edge and we have never seen any potential crack development or weakness at this point. We will look to an alternative, but care will have to be taken that say any sticky label does not attack the plastic and make any problem worse.
Maybe this is not the time to pick up on the statement that because the amourers cannot test some thing it should not be allowed. Every comp F.I.E or National event fencing you accept the mark on a blade that says it is maraging and therefore 5 times or more safer than a carbon steel blade or that the mask is 1600N or the clothing 800N you cannot test these items, why pick on visor masks?

[LordShout]

Two problems that I have with visors masks, why I love to pick on them in other words.

A: We already had a working system, while I understand the desire "If it ain't broke it doesn't have enough features yet" we're not talking about tinkering with a TV set or a car, we're talking about protective equipment for the face. I like my face. Of course I suck and so don't need a visor mask but I imagine other fencers forced to use them like their faces intact as well.

B: How many nonmask injuries have happened in the last 20 years? How many of these involved people not properly using their equipment?

How many visor masks injuries have happened where the poor sap thought he was playing by the rules?

These are both low numbers, but in general those I respect seem to evaluate the risk as significantly higher for visor masks. Why add the extra risk?

[Barry Paul]

Just for the record I have never thought that fencers shouldbe forced to use a visor mask (except in the olympics??? ) The manufacturers should be making a mask so good that fencers want to use them. In the U.K. there a number of fencers world, national and club class who actively want to wear a Leon Paul vision mask. In 10 or 20 years time most fencers will be using some sort of vision mask. It is called that unstoppable force progress.

[Greybeard]

OK. I am unclear (no pun intended) on equipment. Brain surgery you know. In one case I feel for all those people that went out to buy a new mask. For wheelchair competition does anyone know what masks we need for NAC/National and for World Cup or other International competition? Do I need a conductive bib in foil?

I am so lost in all the convos.