Hi Rich, > First, do we have clear, unambiguous definitions for our safety symbols? Based on the very short definitions in 417, I think not. > I believe we need much more work on the definitions.
As you know, standards are not static things set in stone. If you think that IEC 60417 needs to be changed to improve understanding then join the relevant committee and make a proposal. No proposal, no change. Even if everyone on this exploder list were to express their agreement with your sentiment, and even if they were to subsequently agree exactly what the change should be, then that would count for nothing unless someone took an action to propose and champion the change. That's just a fact of life in any standards making forum that I've been associated with, and is certainly true in the IEC. > Products should be designed so that no safety symbols/words are required (at least for the user/operator). A very laudable viewpoint and one that is easily achievable in the examples you provided. However, with certain products there has to be a residual risk or the product simply will not function. Show me an electric chainsaw that has no residual risk and I'll show you a piece of worthless junk. Nearer to home, photocopiers and certain laser printers use a hot fuser to melt the toner on/into the paper, sometimes the paper (or acetate, especially if the user uses what's to hand rather than ordering the correct type) gets stuck in/on the fuser (depending whether it uses radiant heat or hot roll technology)and the operator needs to remove it. The manufacturer has to select a temperature and technology that it is not so hot that it burns the end user - but equally is not so cold that it takes ages for the equipment to cool down and heat up to working temperature again. This could be done with a temperature sensor that does not operate a solenoid to permit human access 'till the temperature is low enough if money were no object, but more often manufactures do not go this far and instead they simply fit a temperature hazard symbol and put suitable instructions in the user manual. > You ask "So what do we do as regards written words?" My response is design the product so that no words or symbols are needed insofar as safety is concerned. And my reply to you is that safety engineers should aim to eliminate or minimise hazards to the maximum extent practicable and safety warnings should only be used as a last resort. However, sometimes the last resort is the only resort left and under such circumstances suitable warnings (whether text or symbols) will need to be used. If a safety standard were ever to mandate that safety warnings could never be used to protect casual users then I suggest to you that such a standard would not be used by a large number of companies. Of course, it is also perfectly reasonable for a company to decide that ITS products will always be designed without recourse to user safety warnings, no matter how high the product cost. Perhaps that company is convinced that the best engineering risk reduction solutions are more 'idiot proof' than the best procedural risk reduction procedures. Perhaps that company concluded that, when awarding damages, the legal system does not always seem to adequately take into account whether the action leading to an injury was as a result of an act made by a person acting in a reasonable or reckless manner. Perhaps that company is concerned about the potential product recall costs and/or loss of 'good name' resulting from a lost law suit or bad press. Equally, another company could perform a similar risk management analysis and come to a different conclusion because its circumstances were different. All the best, Richard Hughes. Safety Answer Ltd. This message is from the IEEE EMC Society Product Safety Technical Committee emc-pstc discussion list. Visit our web site at: http://www.ewh.ieee.org/soc/emcs/pstc/ To cancel your subscription, send mail to: [email protected] with the single line: unsubscribe emc-pstc For help, send mail to the list administrators: Ron Pickard: [email protected] Dave Heald: [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Richard Nute: [email protected] Jim Bacher: [email protected] Archive is being moved, we will announce when it is back on-line. All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
