Collection of rationales for EN 1176 - Requirements

This Technical Report is intended to be read in conjunction with EN 1176.
The rationales given in this Technical Report describe the main reasons behind the requirements given in EN 1176. The requirements in the standard are the tools (e.g. measures, testing methods etc.) by which the objectives are intended to be reached.

Sammlung von grundsätzlichen Überlegungen zur EN 1176 – Anforderungen

Recueil d'exposés des motifs concernant l'EN 1176 - Exigences

Le présent Rapport technique est destiné à être lu conjointement avec l’EN 1176.
Les justifications exposées dans le présent Rapport technique décrivent les principales raisons qui sous tendent les exigences spécifiées dans l’EN 1176. Les exigences de la norme sont les outils (par exemple, dimensions, méthodes d’essai, etc.) par le biais desquels les objectifs sont supposés être atteints.

Zbirka osnovnih utemeljitev za EN 1176 - Zahteve

General Information

Status
Withdrawn
Publication Date
18-Feb-2014
Withdrawal Date
02-May-2023
Current Stage

Relations

Buy Standard

Technical report
TP CEN/TR 16598:2014
English language
45 pages
sale 10% off
Preview
sale 10% off
Preview
e-Library read for
1 day

Standards Content (Sample)


SLOVENSKI STANDARD
01-april-2014
Zbirka osnovnih utemeljitev za EN 1176 - Zahteve
Collection of rationales for EN 1176 - Requirements
Sammlung von grundsätzlichen Überlegungen zur EN 1176 – Anforderungen
Recueil d'exposés des motifs concernant l'EN 1176 - Exigences
Ta slovenski standard je istoveten z: CEN/TR 16598:2014
ICS:
97.200.40 ,JULãþD Playgrounds
2003-01.Slovenski inštitut za standardizacijo. Razmnoževanje celote ali delov tega standarda ni dovoljeno.

TECHNICAL REPORT
CEN/TR 16598
RAPPORT TECHNIQUE
TECHNISCHER BERICHT
February 2014
ICS 97.200.40
English Version
Collection of rationales for EN 1176 - Requirements
Recueil d'exposés des motifs concernant l'EN 1176 - Sammlung von grundsätzlichen Überlegungen zur EN 1176
Exigences - Anforderungen
This Technical Report was approved by CEN on 30 September 2013. It has been drawn up by the Technical Committee CEN/TC 136.

CEN members are the national standards bodies of Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia,
Finland, Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania,
Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and United
Kingdom.
EUROPEAN COMMITTEE FOR STANDARDIZATION
COMITÉ EUROPÉEN DE NORMALISATION

EUROPÄISCHES KOMITEE FÜR NORMUNG

CEN-CENELEC Management Centre: Avenue Marnix 17, B-1000 Brussels
© 2014 CEN All rights of exploitation in any form and by any means reserved Ref. No. CEN/TR 16598:2014 E
worldwide for CEN national Members.

Contents Page
Foreword .3
Introduction .4
1 Scope .6
2 Normative references .6
3 Terms and definitions .6
4 Part 1 .6
5 Part 2 . 19
6 Part 3 . 22
7 Part 4 . 24
8 Part 5 . 27
9 Part 6 . 33
10 Part 7 . 37
11 Part 10 . 40
12 Part 11 . 44
Bibliography . 45

Foreword
This document (CEN/TR 16598:2014) has been prepared by Technical Committee CEN/TC 136 “Sports,
playground and other recreational facilities and equipment”, the secretariat of which is held by DIN.
Attention is drawn to the possibility that some of the elements of this document may be the subject of patent
rights. CEN [and/or CENELEC] shall not be held responsible for identifying any or all such patent rights.
Introduction
The intention of the safety standard for playground equipment was to avoid situations in which a child, due to
his age or ability or stage of development, is unable to comprehend a risk.
It was the intention to eliminate traps and risks from which severe harm could occur for the user.
In consideration of this, the task group choose the form of a report in which the objective mentions repeatedly
that the aim of the standard is always to protect the child from harm.
It has become apparent that users of the standard have sometimes lost sight of this and were just considering
dimensions, functionality or spaces and special equipment parts without regard for the safety aim.
When considering the complexity of an equipment and the efforts to provide safety, these efforts should be
proportionate to the incidents that take place in real life.
Dimensions should not be taken as absolute as juristic and safety treatments are different in relation to the
risk of a deviation from the standard.
A large number of the objectives for the rationales are repeated. This is intentional as it reinforces the safety
aim of the standard and prevents the misunderstanding of a rationale when taken in isolation.
Working on the rationales for the single paragraphs, it became obvious for the task group that there where
parts in the standard which had been discussed very often and deeply (e.g. the damping qualities of surfaces,
HIC) and there were other parts that had no or very little discussions (e.g. hard edges at the end of a falling
space).
Noticing this it was nearly self-evident to have an assessment / evaluation proposal for all requirements:
a) fundamental safety issues:
1) safety installations / regulations have to prevent situations that may cause the death of a user;
2) safety installations / regulations have to prevent situations that may lead to a loss of extremities of a
user;
3) safety installations / regulations have to prevent situations that may cause a lifetime disability
(blindness, paraplegia);
4) safety installations / regulations have to prevent situations in which a user is not able to free himself
out of a trap;
b) basic safety issues:
1) safety installations / regulations should prevent situations which overburden the user according to his
age and prevent accidents like bone fractures, bruises, abrasions although these injuries happen in
everyday life as well and are accepted by society as things that may happen to a human being;
c) standard issues:
1) man-made playground equipment is necessary because the city environments don’t offer natural play
facilities. Therefore, this kind of equipment is meant to advance the development of the child.
As there are very different development levels during childhood it means that the equipment has to be
engineered in such a tricky way that it supports the several stages of development and screens the different
age groups.
At least it should be mentioned that the requirements of the standard are just a concern about the effect of an
equipment on the user. They do not consider the necessity and the social impact of a playground e.g. in areas
where children have no natural resources with which they could play.
The standard cannot account for the behaviour of children. The ideal is that children should use the play
environment as a means of personal development. However, it is accepted that the behaviour of children
cannot be controlled by a technical standard. The best way to deal with this is to adopt a Risk Assessment
process, which will allow the behaviour of children to be considered as part of the inspection of the play
environment.
Risk Assessment has to take into account the competence and ability of the potential users of the equipment
and the foreseeable risks to those users. It is possible to allow greater challenge and opportunity in play
equipment by controlling access to equipment, the control of access has to take in to account the abilities and
skills of the user. The standard lists some ways in which access can be controlled.
It is not possible to control the way in which parents or carers may influence the use of play equipment, in
particular if they allow, encourage or assist children to overcome controls on access imposed by the designer.
The task group did not review the annexes of the different parts of the standard EN 1176; even though these
contain wording that can be considered to be hidden requirements.
Again, it turns out to be true that there is no overlapping with EN 71-8.
1 Scope
This Technical Report is intended to be read in conjunction with EN 1176.
The rationales given in this Technical Report describe the main reasons behind the requirements given in
EN 1176. The requirements in the standard are the tools (e.g. measures, testing methods etc.) by which the
objectives are intended to be reached.
2 Normative references
The following documents, in whole or in part, are normatively referenced in this document and are
indispensable for its application. For dated references, only the edition cited applies. For undated references,
the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies.
EN 1176 (all parts), Playground equipment and surfacing
3 Terms and definitions
For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply.
3.1
objective
what is the intention of the clause in the standard
3.2
risk
what might happen to the user if the objective is not achieved
3.3
rationale
the reason for making this specific requirement
Note 1 to entry: Often you will find rationales in the notes given in the requirements. This is mentioned in the document.
3.4
addendum
additional comments as well as remarks
4 Part 1
4.1 Paragraph in Standard: 4.1.2 Flammability
Objective To avoid burning – particularly from those materials which produce flaming droplets of molten
material which are difficult to extinguish.
Risk
In the event of a flash fire there is insufficient time to intervene and protect the user. The
outcome of a fire may be death or disfigurement.
Rationale The correct selection of materials to ideally prevent this occurring or allow escape from the
equipment.
4.2 Paragraph in Standard: 4.1.3 Timber and associated products
Objective protect the user from harm as a result of unforeseen failure of equipment due to decay of
wooden parts.
a) wood is a natural material and will decay with time, sufficient attention shall be paid to its design;
protection and maintenance to ensure that structures made of wood are safe especially between
maintenance cycles;
b) wood can splinter;
c) hazards from species and treatment of wood.
Risk
a) unforeseen failure of equipment;
b) puncture injuries, eye injuries;
c) allergic reaction, it is considered unlikely that poisoning by ingestion will occur.
Rationale
a) following the requirements of the standard the possibility of failure of the equipment can be controlled
within the maintenance intervals;
b) and c) the selection of the wood type can reduce or eliminate this risk.
Addendum wood as a natural material will crack as part of the drying process; this does not necessarily
present a dangerous situation.
4.3 Paragraph in Standard: 4.1.4 Metals
Objective protect the user from harm as a result of unforeseen failure of equipment due to corrosion of
metal parts.
Risk injury may occur due to unforeseen failure of metal components.
Rationale
a) metals, either as a structural component or as an auxiliary component, can corrode either due to
atmospheric conditions or by electrochemical reaction; sufficient attention shall be paid to its design;
protection and maintenance to ensure that structures made of metal are safe, especially between
maintenance cycles;
b) metals that produce toxic oxidation shall be coated.
4.4 Paragraph in Standard: 4.1.5 Synthetics
Objective protect the user from harm as a result of unrecognized failure of equipment due to aging or
breaking of synthetic materials.
Risk reinforced materials can produce splinters and cuts; static supporting parts may break.
Rationale use of coloured gelcoats to indicate wear and maintenance according to intervals given by the
manufacturer can prevent the risk.
4.5 Paragraph in Standard: 4.1.6 Dangerous substances
Objective protect the user from harm as a result of being exposed to dangerous substances.
Risk poisoning by skin contact; poisoning by mouth contact; chemical burns.
Rationale following the guidelines given in different standards can reduce the risk.
4.6 Paragraph in Standard: 4.2.1 (Design and manufacture) General
Objective protect the user groups from excessive demands.
Risk false estimation of equipment use.
Rationale play always includes risks (see the introduction to the standard). The intended user shall be
able to use the equipment according to his mental and physical stage of development without getting in
trouble caused by the equipment.
Remark the German translation does not completely correspond to the English original text.
4.7 Paragraph in Standard: 4.2.2 Structural integrity
Objective protect the user from harm as a result of breaking down of the used equipment.
Risk severe injuries may occur if a play structure or parts of it collapse during use.
Rationale equipment designed according to the methods described will be structurally suitable.
There may
...

Questions, Comments and Discussion

Ask us and Technical Secretary will try to provide an answer. You can facilitate discussion about the standard in here.