> From: Niels Hougaard > Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 3:27 AM > > Two NRTL's have been asked and both have said that there is > no standard and both say that they can/will not do an > approval for US/Canada.
I suspect the reason for the NRTLs not wishing to perform an evaluation is that the electronics is only a small part of much larger equipment and that the much larger equipment has no standard for which an NRTL can or will evaluate against. Also, there's a lot of potential liability for children misusing the playground equipment and getting hurt that the agencies can readily foresee (in many ways, legally speaking, playground equipment is inherently unsafe and represents an attractive nuisance). The NRTLs can, however, evaluate the product and provide you with a letter report on the performance of the electronic portions in conjunction with the overall equipment and how well it's protected, etc. > What standards would you recommend for US/Canada? Many elements of playground equipment are inherently unsafe, especially considering how children use such equipment. The US CPSC points to ASTM/F1487. Refer to http://www.cpsc.gov/volstd/publicplayground/publicplayground.html In the US, there have been lawsuits because children used playground equipment in public parks, provided by city governments, where some kid gets a bump on the noggin or a broken limb for doing something an adult would think was stupid and, if the parents were paying attention to their kids instead of chatting or reading, would or should have taken action to prevent. The cities, of course, claimed sovereign immunity, so eventually the equipment manufacturers are named in suits. A park near where I was living when my kids were young enough to enjoy playground equipment, had cordoned off the equipment and posted a sign after a lawsuit was filed, stating that the equipment should not be used. A couple of weeks and complaints from many other parents got the sign, etc, removed. All that aside, kids can turn almost anything into an unsafe product. I know I did. Regards, Peter L. Tarver, PE [email protected] CONFIDENTIALITY This e-mail message and any attachments thereto, is intended only for use by the addressee(s) named herein and may contain legally privileged and/or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail message, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail message, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail message in error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the original and any copies of this email and any prints thereof. ABSENT AN EXPRESS STATEMENT TO THE CONTRARY HEREINABOVE, THIS E-MAIL IS NOT INTENDED AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR A WRITING. Notwithstanding the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act or the applicability of any other law of similar substance and effect, absent an express statement to the contrary hereinabove, this e-mail message its contents, and any attachments hereto are not intended to represent an offer or acceptance to enter into a contract and are not otherwise intended to bind the sender, Sanmina-SCI Corporation (or any of its subsidiaries), or any other person or entity. - 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
