Peter, In Canada the general machine safeguarding standard, CSA Z432, is the place to go for content requirements for user documentation. This is a voluntary standard, so it does not carry the legal weight of a document such as 98/37/EC, Annex 1, Section 1.7, but it does provide good guidance. There is no equivalent legal requirement in Canada to the EHSR’s found in the various Directives. If you follow the EU Directive guidance for content you will meet 90% of the requirements given in any of the Canadian documents. The only exceptions may be found in the product specific standards, such as CSA Z434 (Industrial Robots) and CSA Z142 (Power Presses), which have a few additional requirements.
Regarding language, Canada has two official languages, English and French. You documentation should be made available in both of these languages as a minimum. Hazard warning signs and labels can follow the EU standards (ISO 3864 + ISO 7000) as long as the labels are explained in the text of the manuals. Alternatively, use of labels meeting ANSI Z535.4 is also acceptable. CSA Z432 calls out the use of CSA Z321 for labelling, but this should be ignored, since the scope of Z321 states that it is not intended for use on products. A new standard recently published, ANSI Z535.6, deals specifically with the integration of hazard warnings into the text of user documentation. I would strongly recommend this standard to you as you develop your documentation. Regarding the US, there are some requirements given in the various product standards which should be followed. I reiterate my comments regarding ANSI Z535.4 and .6. For industrial products, refer to NFPA 79 for guidance. This standard provides very similar requirements to EN 60204-1. Regarding language, English is the predominant tongue, with Spanish a close second. There is no official language in the USA at this time. To answer your question regarding a single safety manual for a range of products, I think that gets a qualified ‘that depends’. If your products are very similar, then this is a possibility. If there are any significant differences, then I would proceed with a separate safety document for each variation. In studies it has been shown that embedding safety information in the body of the user manual provides for better comprehension and retention of the information in the user. This alone should make you consider whether a separate manual will be as effective as you need it to be. Finally, a word about safety approvals. If you are bringing in a small number of units, say 1-100 per year, or if there is a high degree of variation unit-to-unit, consider using the Field Evaluation approach. In this method an inspector will look at every unit and label the units after inspection and modification, if required. This can be done for both the US and Canada. If the quantity will exceed 100 per year, then either Field Certification or full certification will be more cost effective in the long run. -- Doug Nix, A.Sc.T. -- Personal Opinion Only IEEE PSES Waterloo Region Canada [email protected] _____ From: Peter Weichel <[email protected]> List-Post: [email protected] Date: Sun, 04 Mar 2007 13:04:44 +0100 To: [email protected] Subject: What are requirements for usermanuals in USA for machinery Hi experts, I wonder if some one has a link or a good advise for where i can get hold on specific requirements for machinery exported to USA/Canada. Of course there are some points in the relevant standards for the equipment, but are there additional rules that apply for contents ? Especially i would like to know, is it OK to make a general product safety manual covering several different products ? One chapter with general safety issues applicable for all products, and after that product specific safety instructions in seperate chapters ? I.e. can we mix information that are not needed with information needed as long as the sections are clealy identifyable for a particular product ?` Hope this gives some kind of meaning.. Best regards Peter - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email ______________________________________________________________________ - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to [email protected] Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas [email protected] Mike Cantwell [email protected] For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: [email protected] David Heald: [email protected] All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc
