Where Does AS/NZS 1801:2024 Type 4 Fit in Modern Construction?

Author: Anthony Ford

Across Australia and New Zealand, the conversation around head protection on construction and infrastructure sites is changing. Modern head injuries extend far beyond objects dropping straight onto the crown of a worker's head. As highlighted in the 2025 white paper Advancing Head Protection in the Building and Construction Industry, a major risk on modern sites is a fall consequence. Slips, trips, and falls from height often mean the worker becomes the falling object, striking the front, side, or rear of their head with a high risk of collision and brain trauma.

To address those risks, New Zealand has accelerated its transition across the broader construction sector. Sites have moved well beyond niche working-at-height roles to make chin-strapped, multi-directional impact helmets standard practice on commercial and infrastructure projects. That transition has been built on helmets certified to the EN 12492 mountaineering standard for off-crown impact protection, bolstered with key industrial test clauses from EN 397:2012 such as lateral shell rigidity and molten metal resistance.

When AS/NZS 1801:2024 introduced a brand-new Type 4 classification built specifically for multi-directional impacts and low-height falls, it marked a significant step in recognising fall-consequence hazards in local standards. It also offered a potential local pathway as Australian construction looks to make a similar transition. Yet two years on, it raises a fundamental question for manufacturers, safety leaders, and employers across both sides of the Tasman. Was Type 4 designed to become the new baseline for everyday construction workers, or is it intended for more specialised, high-risk roles?

A Departure from Global Benchmarks

While Standards Australia committee deliberations are confidential, looking at the standard itself shows a clear departure from major international benchmarks.
Rather than aligning with BS EN 397:2025 Type 2, which pairs secure chinstrap retention with a 10 kN off-crown transmitted force limit, AS/NZS 1801:2024 Type 4 enforces a strict ≤ 5 kN transmitted force limit across crown, front, side, and rear impacts. It also mandates testing with accessories attached.

Setting a tighter threshold on paper is one thing. Translating it into a helmet that global manufacturers will build, and workers will wear for a full shift, is another.

Who Is Type 4 Built For, and Will Manufacturers Build It?

For any new helmet classification to succeed, two things need to align. Manufacturers need a viable market to justify tooling up, and employers need a clear reason to specify it over established international alternatives. Right now, Type 4 faces steep commercial and practical hurdles:

• Global Manufacturing Scale: Global helmet manufacturers engineer their shells and liners primarily for the massive European (EN) and North American (ANSI/ISEA Z89.1 Type II) markets. Developing and certifying a bespoke shell and liner system solely to pass a unique 5 kN off-crown test for the relatively small Australia and New Zealand market is a major commercial ask. The Working at Height Association’s (WAHA) March 2026 technical bulletin (WAHA-TB-003.02) notes that Type 4 certified helmets are "not yet widely available". To date, no commercially available helmet with verified Type 4 certification has appeared on the market.

• Weight and Wearability on Site: Industry engineering assessments indicate that absorbing enough energy to keep transmitted forces below 5 kN on the sides and rear of the head requires substantially thicker, denser shells and foam liners extending lower down the helmet, paired with heavier multi-point suspension harnesses. In practical terms, that pushes a bare helmet toward 600g before earmuffs, visors, or headlamps are even clipped on. That is a noticeable jump over current ~470g multi-directional helmets. For everyday construction crews, extra weight increases neck fatigue and heat retention. PPE only protects workers if they keep it strapped on.

Where Does That Leave AS/NZS 1801 Type 4?

Employers looking to move beyond traditional Type 1 hard hats are not waiting on the sidelines for Type 4 stock to arrive. Across New Zealand’s broader construction sector, sites have already proven the practicality of EN 12492 helmets tested against key EN 397 industrial clauses. As global manufacturers roll out BS EN 397:2025 Type 2 and ANSI Z89.1 Type II ranges, both New Zealand and Australian contractors have clear, lightweight, and globally supported pathways forward.

Unless global manufacturers see a viable commercial reason to build to that 5 kN specification and employers see a practical case for choosing it over proven international helmets, AS/NZS 1801:2024 Type 4 risks remaining a standard on paper while the industry moves ahead without it.

References

1. Ford, A. (2025). Advancing Head Protection in the Building and Construction Industry. ZERO Height Safety.

2. British Standards Institution (2025). BS EN 397:2025 Industrial safety helmets (Introduction of Type 2 off-crown impact classification).

3. International Safety Equipment Association (2014 / R2019). ANSI/ISEA Z89.1 American National Standard for Industrial Head Protection (Type II off-crown impact requirements).

4. Working at Height Association (2026). Technical Bulletin WAHA-TB-003.02: Guidance on Head Protection (8 March 2026).

5. Standards Australia / Standards New Zealand (2024). AS/NZS 1801:2024 Occupational protective helmets.