Independent testing reveals why appearances can be deceptive when it comes to protecting warehouse racking.
Walk around any major logistics trade fair and you’ll find a variety of rack protection products on display. Brightly coloured, made from various polymers and elastomers, many of them appear remarkably similar to the untrained eye. Their manufacturers will all claim they are robust, effective and capable of protecting valuable warehouse infrastructure from forklift impacts. But in reality, are they all the same?
Sentry Protection Products believes the answer is a resounding no. In fact, the company argues that significant differences exist between products that, at first glance, appear almost identical. The challenge, however, is proving it to those charged with specifying the product, on whose shoulders the responsibility of running a safe workplace falls.
Everybody claims to have the best rack protector… That’s a hard fact. You go to a trade show, look through brochures or visit websites, and every product sounds fantastic. But not everybody can be the best – that’s simply impossible. We wanted to find a way to cut through the marketing hype and get to the facts.
says Jim Ryan, founder of Sentry Protection Products.
The issue is an important one. Pallet racking forms the backbone of modern warehousing operations, supporting hundreds of thousands of tonnes of inventory every day. Damage to rack uprights caused by forklift impacts remains one of the leading causes of rack failures, potentially resulting in injuries, damaged goods, operational disruption and costly repairs.
Rack protectors are designed to absorb impact energy and help preserve the structural integrity of the rack, yet while many products look alike externally, their performance characteristics can vary significantly.
The reality is that customers often assume a rack protector is a rack protector… If they can’t see a meaningful difference, human nature says they’ll choose the cheaper option. The problem is that they may not be comparing like with like.
Jim explains.
The answer was to create from scratch a testing protocol that spelled out clearly and objectively the difference in performance that exists between outwardly visually similar products. Sentry commissioned Element Materials Technology, an independent testing facility based in Michigan, to design and conduct a comparative evaluation of a range of rack protection products available on the market.
The brief was straightforward, but far from simple: develop a testing methodology that would assess each product under identical conditions, using the same criteria, while ensuring that the only variable was the rack protector itself.
Compression testing was selected as the most appropriate approach. “Compression is a common denominator when it comes to rack protection,” says Ryan. “Ultimately, what matters is how much force a protector can absorb before it bottoms out and stops doing its job.”
The independent test measured the compressive force resistance of each protector and its ability to recover following sustained loading. Each product was compressed between a rigid beam and a flat plate, with pressure steadily increased until either visual failure occurred or a predetermined load threshold was reached. The evaluation included Sentry’s Rack Sentry and Rack Sentry CONTOUR products alongside several other well-known competitor brands operating within the market.
The results proved illuminating. Testing found that Rack Sentry demonstrated the highest level of performance, with Rack Sentry CONTOUR ranking second. In practical terms, both products were able to absorb higher levels of force before losing effectiveness compared with the alternatives tested.
“The more energy a rack protector absorbs, the more it protects the rack upright behind it,” Ryan explains. “Our goal wasn’t to embarrass competitors. It was to provide meaningful information so that customers could make informed decisions based on performance rather than assumptions.”
For warehouse operators under constant pressure to control costs, that distinction matters. The consequences of selecting inappropriate protection extend far beyond the initial purchase price. Rack repairs, damaged stock, operational downtime and the potential safety implications of structural failures can quickly outweigh any savings achieved through choosing a lower-cost product.
“Testing gives people confidence,” concludes Jim Ryan. “We’re not asking customers to take our word for it. Independent testing provides transparency. It allows them to understand what they’re buying and why performance differences matter.”
