+ All Categories
Home > Documents > ANSI/ASSE Z359.14-2012 vs. CE’s DIN EN 360ultrasafeusa.com/ppt/ANSI vs CE.pdf · 2014. 5. 5. ·...

ANSI/ASSE Z359.14-2012 vs. CE’s DIN EN 360ultrasafeusa.com/ppt/ANSI vs CE.pdf · 2014. 5. 5. ·...

Date post: 26-Mar-2021
Category:
Upload: others
View: 2 times
Download: 0 times
Share this document with a friend
6
ANSI/ASSE Z359.14-2012 vs. CE’s DIN EN 360
Transcript
Page 1: ANSI/ASSE Z359.14-2012 vs. CE’s DIN EN 360ultrasafeusa.com/ppt/ANSI vs CE.pdf · 2014. 5. 5. · RESPONSE Dear Marty, IKAR is testing their units since the beginning of 2012 at

ANSI/ASSE Z359.14-2012

vs.CE’s DIN EN 360

Page 2: ANSI/ASSE Z359.14-2012 vs. CE’s DIN EN 360ultrasafeusa.com/ppt/ANSI vs CE.pdf · 2014. 5. 5. · RESPONSE Dear Marty, IKAR is testing their units since the beginning of 2012 at

LEADING EDGE RETRACTABLESClass B

• Recognizing of the Hazard

• Manufacturers

• Recommendation

• Company Policy

• OHSA

• ANSI

Ultra-Safe 2005

2012 Miller 2012 DBI

Approved for leading edge and footlevel drops.

Page 3: ANSI/ASSE Z359.14-2012 vs. CE’s DIN EN 360ultrasafeusa.com/ppt/ANSI vs CE.pdf · 2014. 5. 5. · RESPONSE Dear Marty, IKAR is testing their units since the beginning of 2012 at

The use of American National Standards is completely voluntary; theirexistence does not in any respect preclude anyone, whether he/shehas approved the standards or not, from manufacturing, marketing,purchasing, or using products, processes, or procedures notconforming to the standards.

The procedures, measures and sanctions applying to counterfeitingof the CE marking vary according to the respective Member State'snational administrative and penal law. Depending on the seriousnessof the crime, economic operators may be liable to a fine and in somecircumstances, imprisonment. However, if the product is not regardedas an imminent safety risk, the manufacturer may be given anopportunity to ensure that the product is in conformity to theapplicable legislation before it is obliged to take the product off themarket.

Page 4: ANSI/ASSE Z359.14-2012 vs. CE’s DIN EN 360ultrasafeusa.com/ppt/ANSI vs CE.pdf · 2014. 5. 5. · RESPONSE Dear Marty, IKAR is testing their units since the beginning of 2012 at

THE USE OF AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS IS COMPLETELYVOLUNTARY their existence does not in any respect preclude anyone,whether he/she has approved the standards or not, frommanufacturing, marketing, purchasing, or using products, processes,or procedures not conforming to the standards.

The procedures, measures and sanctions applying to counterfeitingof the CE marking vary according to the respective Member State'snational administrative and penal law. Depending on the seriousnessof the crime, economic operators may be liable to a fine and in somecircumstances, imprisonment. However, if the product is not regardedas an imminent safety risk, the manufacturer may be given anopportunity to ensure that the product is in conformity to theapplicable legislation before it is obliged to take the product off themarket.

Page 5: ANSI/ASSE Z359.14-2012 vs. CE’s DIN EN 360ultrasafeusa.com/ppt/ANSI vs CE.pdf · 2014. 5. 5. · RESPONSE Dear Marty, IKAR is testing their units since the beginning of 2012 at

THE USE OF AMERICAN NATIONAL STANDARDS IS COMPLETELYVOLUNTARY their existence does not in any respect preclude anyone,whether he/she has approved the standards or not, frommanufacturing, marketing, purchasing, or using products, processes,or procedures not conforming to the standards.

The procedures, measures and sanctions applying to counterfeitingof the CE marking vary according to the respective Member State'snational administrative and penal law. Depending on the seriousnessof the crime, economic operators MAY BE LIABLE TO A FINE AND INSOME CIRCUMSTANCES, IMPRISONMENT. However, if the productis not regarded as an imminent safety risk, the manufacturer may begiven an opportunity to ensure that the product is in conformity tothe applicable legislation before it is obliged to take the product offthe market.

Page 6: ANSI/ASSE Z359.14-2012 vs. CE’s DIN EN 360ultrasafeusa.com/ppt/ANSI vs CE.pdf · 2014. 5. 5. · RESPONSE Dear Marty, IKAR is testing their units since the beginning of 2012 at

RESPONSE

Dear Marty,

IKAR is testing their units since the beginning of 2012 at CSA in Toronto according all current CSA and ANSI standards. All units fulfilled the CSA Z259.2.2and ANSI Z359.1-2007 standard.

The effective date for the new ANSI standard Z359.1-14 for retractables was August 20, 2012, which was later than our tests and CSA needs some time toprovide these new tests as a third party test house.

But all IKAR units were already tested with a fall over a sharp edge – long before ANSI was discussing this matter. In Europe we have a sharp edge testsince 2005 and IKAR was the first manufacturer getting this new additional certificates.

The requirements of the European sharp edge tests you will find in the attached file. Additional to these requirements the IKAR retractables were testedwith a test mass of 136kg (instead of 100kg as described in the attached document); the new ANSI standard requires only 128 kg. Comparing the testrequirements between ANSI and CE you will see that CE is testing the units with a free fall of 2m and ANSI with only 1.5m.

Peter MasshoffIKAR

TEMPERATURES

WEIGHTS

DIN EN 360 ANSI Z359.14-2012 CSA Z259.2.2

Cold: -30°C / -22°F Cold: -40°C / -40°F Cold: -35°C / -22°F

Hot: +50°C / 122°F Hot: +54°C / +129°F n.n.

Wet: 3h with 70l/h besprüen Wet: 3h with 70l/h besprüen n.n.

DIN EN 360 ANSI Z359.14-2012 CSA Z259.2.2

100kg / IKAR: 136kg 128kg n.n.

1500mm/2000mm 1500mm n.n.

1500mm/2000mm 1500mm n.n.


Recommended