Flashback Friday: Ever wonder how they test condoms? Behold the “laboratory coital model.”

By Seriously Science | November 22, 2013 7:00 am

Fig. 1.
Coital model at SSL Cambridge Technical Centre.

It’s probably not surprising that condoms are put through rigorous testing by their manufacturers. And it probably makes sense that the machines used would look…realistic. Here, the makers of Durex condoms report the results of this testing, along with evaluations of returned broken condoms (eww!), over a period of 7 years. They found that most of the breakage that was not due to misuse was due to “blunt puncture,” where “the tip of the thrusting male penis progressively stretches one part of the intact condom wall until it ultimately breaks.” They are careful to note that this is not a manufacturing defect, but simply due to “the circumstances that arise during an individual act of intercourse.” 

Male condoms that break in use do so mostly by a “blunt puncture” mechanism.

Published condom breakage studies typically report the percentage of failures but rarely provide any evidence on the mechanism of failure.
Over a period of 7 years, broken condoms returned to a supplier (SSL, Durex) via consumer complaints were examined to determine the cause of failure. Also, some consumers who reported breakage but did not return condoms were sent a questionnaire on the causes of breakage. Finally, theories proposed for the mechanism of breakage were investigated on a laboratory coital model.
Nearly 1000 (n=972) returned condoms made from natural rubber and polyurethane were examined. Visible features on those that were broken, were classified. Evidence combined from examining returns, questionnaire responses and the coital model strongly suggests a single predominant mechanism of failure we named “blunt puncture,” where the tip of the thrusting male penis progressively stretches one part of the intact condom wall until it ultimately breaks.
Blunt puncture appears to be the mechanism of breakage responsible for more than 90% of condom breakage not attributable to misuse. Knowledge of the main mechanism of breakage should help develop better user instructions, better test methods and, ultimately, better condoms.”


Related content:
Friday Flashback: Accidental condom inhalation.
NCBI ROFL: Does semen have antidepressant properties?

  • Brad Kilmer

    I wonder if the researchers are now aroused by the sound of pneumatic pistons reciprocating… , , …

    • Brad Kilmer

      Ha! the first 6 tags were my attempt at creating sound effects with text, the last 6 (slash) tags were created automatically to ensure html-tag-closure by the web-page software. Further evidence that for every action there is an equal-and-opposite reaction.

  • Brad Richmond

    Drat those dang robots, taking all the good jobs, Machines! They have no soul they don’t know tenderness, what are we coming too?lol


Seriously, Science?

Seriously, Science?, formerly known as NCBI ROFL, is the brainchild of two prone-to-distraction biologists. We highlight the funniest, oddest, and just plain craziest research from the PubMed research database and beyond. Because nobody said serious science couldn't be silly!
Follow us on Twitter: @srslyscience.
Send us paper suggestions: srslyscience[at]gmail.com.

See More


Discover's Newsletter

Sign up to get the latest science news delivered weekly right to your inbox!

Collapse bottom bar