15.12.2016 - Ausgabe: 6/2016

Changes and updates to EN 1176

An interview with Andreas Strupp (Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Wood Technology, Department of Quality Assurance, Product Safety and Standards at eibe Produktion + Vertrieb GmbH & Co. KG, FLL/BSFH accredited playground inspector per DIN SPEC 79161, Chairman of the Standards Committee NA Sport 112-07-01 AA 'Playground equipment')

Children are our most precious asset. And, of course, we all want to give them the best possible start in life ‒ this means we place considerable emphasis on making sure that they remain safe. But this understandable desire to ensure they are protected must be appropriately balanced with the need to provide them with appropriate challenges through play. Children require both time and opportunity to discover their own limitations, to develop skills and become confident with regard to their motor abilities.

Planners, playground equipment manufacturers and playground operators thus have major responsibilities in this respect. Planners must draw up a concept that is appropriate to the local situation, manufacturers are required to supply safe equipment while operators need to make certain that playground safety is maintained by means of repair and inspection. In their work, all these persons are guided by the provisions of the EN 1176 standard series.

This series is currently undergoing updating to take into account recent new findings obtained since the last revision of the standards in 2008. The work on Part 2 for swings, Part 3 for slides and Part 6 for rocking equipment is already far advanced. A second survey has even been undertaken in preparation for the redrafting of Part 1 of EN 1176 on general safety requirements and test methods. This was because there were numerous comments in response to the first survey and the reports of the European standards committees had been provided in the meantime. It was decided to submit these to the various committees for review. This process has now been completed.

 

Playground@Landscape: When is it likely that the updated parts of the German version of EN 1176 will be published and when will they come into effect?

Andreas Strupp: The publication of the various revised parts of the German standard DIN EN 1176, on playground equipment and surfacings, depends to a large extent on when Part 1 on general safety requirements and test methods appears. It is expected that this will be issued in summer 2017 as standard DIN EN 1176-1 and the corresponding sections with their specific additional requirements will appear in due course.

 

P@L: What sort of major changes will be apparent in the new EN 1176-1?

Andreas Strupp: The main differences take the form of linguistic and technical modifications. Wording has been rephrased so that the requirements and the purposes of these can be more readily recognised. With regard to the technical aspects, we assume that there will be alterations or additions with regard to the following:

 

New definition: adequate level of surface impact attenuation
In the currently revised form of the EN 1176 standard series, it will be necessary following its publication to determine critical fall height on the basis of an HIC test as specified in EN 1177. This means that in all passages in Part 1 in which critical fall height is cited as the determinant for impact attenuation, measurement of the corresponding HIC reading will be required. However, this is not intended to apply to natural, non-synthetic, loose fill material and turf. A new term ‒ adequate level of impact attenuation ‒ has thus been introduced.
There are various ways in which it is possible to evaluate and ensure compliance:
- Use of the sieve test for sand/gravel as specified in EN 933 -1
- Use of the materials and fill depths specified in the current German table F1 (Table 4 in other parts of the EU)
- Determination of critical fall height as defined in EN 1177 (it is possible that an additional method may be added)
- Provision of another form of evidence of adequate impact attenuation
These changes will apply across the board to the whole of the standard text and will, except in a few instances, replace the current stipulations with regard to critical fall height.
 

New definition: playground trampoline
This is not relevant to trampolines used for sport purposes or trampolines for private use but only to playground trampolines that provide for considerably less bounce power.
 

Revised definition of single post equipment
The extensive definition provided in the draft version of the standard prEN 1176-1:2016 has been reworked so that in the new version the requirements for single post equipment will again be restricted to foundations and supports.

More specific definition of openings in guardrails and barriers (4.2.4.3; 4.2.4.4)
Additions have been made to the stipulations with regard to the horizontal size of access and egress openings.
The current working paper specifies that openings are to be measured at one point only in the case of barriers and at any site in the case of guardrails. Guardrails that are positioned more than 89 mm above the level of a platform may have a maximum opening of 500 mm to the 'top of the guardrail'.
A new caption has been added to the images in figure 10, explaining that these are steep play elements.

Revision of finger entrapment stipulations (4.2.7.6)
Notes and additional specifications have been added. The objective is to limit testing to sites in which it is possible that falls could occur. The current stipulations still too often also apply to entrapment sites in sections of equipment that are not designed to be used and from which falls are thus unlikely.
I am personally pleased to see that the reference to dry cracks in wooden elements that appeared in prEN 1176-1:2016 has now also been extended to horizontal components in the new version. No testing is required here because these taper inwards.

More clear-cut illustration of free height of fall in figure 14 f (4.2.8.1)
An illustration has been added in the current draft version to make it clear under what circumstances it is permissible to subtract 1 m when calculating maximum free height of fall.
After extensive discussion, it has been decided that free height of fall should continue to be calculated from the upper surface of horizontal bars.
The discussion brought to light the fact that, depending on the positioning of equipment users, the values for maximum height of fall, hand support and body centre of gravity can differ. A newly added appendix to the current draft provides illustrations in diagram form of these aspects.

Explanations of requirements with regard to fall heights and impact attenuation (4.2.8.5.2)
In the current status of revision, there will be no changes in section 4.2.8.5.2 with regard to the following, namely the critical fall height must be greater than the equipment free height of fall. This provision has been deliberately left as is because the obtained new insights are based on this tried-and-tested stipulation.
However, this does not mean that critical fall height represents the determinant for the degree of impact attenuation required for every equipment height of fall. This is not the intention. The main objective is not simply to require that critical fall heights are determined but to ensure that an adequate level of impact attenuation is provided (cf. the new definition). In the case of turf, for example, it is explicitly stated that it is not necessary to determine the corresponding HIC value per EN 1177.

Changes to Table 4 (Surfacings)
In line with the considerations outlined above, 'critical fall height' has reverted to 'maximum height of fall' in Table 4 and thus now corresponds in this respect with Table F1 that is applicable within Germany instead of Table 4 as a national exception.
With the introduction of the new term 'maximum height of fall', it is no longer possible to misinterpret the provisions and suppose that the materials specified in Table 4 must be subjected to HIC testing prior to use. It is again reiterated in Table 4 that no further testing of the impact attenuation provided by the listed materials is necessary if they conform to the stipulations in Table 4.

Sand and gravel have been put together. The technical consideration behind this is that it is uniformity of grain size that primarily determines the impact attenuation effect. A corresponding sieve analysis of materials in areas where there is transition from sand to gravel surfacing should also be possible. Compliance with requirements with regard to the uniformity coefficient of grain size can be demonstrated by generating a sieve line using the sieve test defined in EN 933 (d60/10<3). In this case, the sieve screen opening at which >60% of a sample passes through the sieve is viewed in relation to the sieve screen opening at which >10% of the sample passes through the sieve. An example sieve line is illustrated in an informative appendix to the sieve test.
A sieve line of d60/10<3 is considered to provide sufficient impact attenuation.

As pointed out above, it is likely that Table F1 will continue to be valid in Germany; in this case, assuming materials comply with the specifications there, they will not need to be subjected to sieve analysis. Operators in Germany will thus only need to demonstrate compliance with sieve characteristics ‒ for sand in the range 0.2 - 2 mm and gravel 2 - 8 mm ‒ a supplier's certificate will suffice.

Operators in other EU countries will not, of course, be able to cite the provisions of Table F1. They will need to provide the corresponding sieve line demonstrating the uniformity coefficient of the material. Sand used for topping up will need to have the identical sieve characteristics and uniformity coefficient as the sand already present so that there is no combination of grain uniformity >3 in the impact area.

Requirements for stairs (4.2.9.2)
A new provision in the current working paper makes it clearer in what kind of situation a guardrail may be used instead of a barrier on stairs leading to platforms of up to 1 m in height.
An image has been added to show the required stipulations for stair risers and treads.
In future, a change of direction of stairs leading to platforms at a height of more than 2 m will not be mandatory ‒ the provision of an intermediate platform will be sufficient.

Requirements for steep play elements (4.2.9.4)
Steep ramps providing access to platforms at a height of more than 1 m will in future be required to have a grasp or handrail.

Provisions for easily accessible playground equipment (4.2.9.5)
In its current status of revision, the standard defines equipment as 'easily accessible' when there is nothing to deter children accessing it directly with hands and feet. Where this is not the case, of course, a supervisor should have sufficient time to intervene to prevent possible accidents. The previous definition has been correspondingly revised.
Three further definitions illustrating increasing difficulty of access have been provided.

Use of chains (4.2.13)
There will be reference to the fact that chains are also subject to wear and tear and that openings in chains can become larger. Risk assessment will thus be required in order to determine whether a chain should be replaced.

New section on playground trampolines

The current working paper contains extensive provisions with regard to playground trampolines, specifying requirements with regard to such aspects as

- Impact surface area

- Edge radii and heights of fall

- Nature of the surfacing under a playground trampoline jump mat

- Requirements with regard to the rebound effect

- Requirements with regard to openings in and around a playground trampoline jump mat

Supplementary information on equipment and ground surfacings
Manufacturers will be required to provide supplementary information on materials used for ground surfacings.
 

Changes to Appendix F; national provisions for Germany
In all likelihood, the exclusion clause relating to the requirements for easily accessible playground equipment will be removed. This conforms to current practice in Germany with regard to playgrounds for which the statutory accident insurance providers are required to provide cover. At the same time, supervision of children under the age of 3 years will continue to be mandatory even if the reference to this is deleted from the national provisions.
The reference to test specimens used prior to 2008 will also be deleted.

 

P@L: In what light do you view the course of the negotiations so far relating to the standard?

Andreas Strupp: Working on EU standards is always a challenge ‒ for everyone involved. This is because you have various groups with opposing interests and countries with differing climatic environments and individual cultural and social conditions. This results in extensive and extended discussions whereby, of course, it should be borne in mind that although too many cooks may spoil the broth, many hands make light work.

What is common to all committees is the desire to ensure children remain safe, a willingness to compromise and acceptance of the democratic approach.

In general, I would say that what we have produced to date is practicable and represents an improvement in terms of safety.

 

P@L: As a German, how do you see the general trends apparent in the revision of EU standards, specifically with regard to requirements for surfacing materials?

Andreas Strupp: Much of the input concerning revision concerns improvements and modification of already existing provisions and these are being undertaken as a result of the new insights we have acquired since 2008. I think it is a good thing that the corresponding passages are being appropriately updated. On the other hand, new concerns are being introduced and revised minimum requirements are being proposed. I am glad to see that European Standards Committee CEN/TC 136/SC1 is trying out a new procedure that involves determining whether circumstances are being accurately represented, whether there are actual cases of relevant accidents and ‒ if this is the case ‒ the significance of these and to what extent the proposed text needs to be amended. This should also help ensure that concise minimum requirements are retained with regard to the really important aspects of safety.

In Germany, the provisions of Table F1 have applied to surfacing materials since 2008. With a few minor alterations, this will also be included in the German version of the updated standard. It currently seems that it will continue to be case that turf will be seen as sufficient to attenuate impact after falls from heights of up to 1.5 m.

Table F1 will also include sand in the grain size 0.2 - 2 mm and gravel in the range 2 - 8 mm as adequate surfacing materials. As far as local authorities in Germany are concerned, these national provisions are of greater consequence as they are permitted to use the prescribed surfacing materials without the need for further testing.

I am pleased to say that, following the extensive discussions on the subject, it has now become apparent that natural impact attenuating materials, such as sand, gravel, bark, woodchip and also turf, will not be subject to the requirement to be tested to HIC.

I would like to take this opportunity to thank the many German experts for all their commitment in working with the various European work groups. We would also not have achieved what we have without the support we have received and continue to receive from the project management team at the German Standards Institute.

 

P@L: Will the revised standard provide for more safety on German and European playgrounds?

Andreas Strupp: In comparison with other leisure pursuits, playing on a playground is a relatively safe activity and that is how it should be. Some of the new minimum requirements will indeed enhance safety, such as those for playground trampolines that supplement guideline 202-081 issued by the German social accident insurance organisation DGUV.
 

However, whenever we consider the aspect of safety we need to bear in mind:

• There is no such thing as 'absolute safety'. Whatever we do, there will continue to be accidents on playgrounds.
• But we continue to work on identifying concealed risks, such as inappropriate dimensions for openings, which can lead to serious accidents. The minimum requirements set out in updated EN 1176 take into account the latest statistics and insights. The standards of the EN 1176 series with their detailed safety stipulations do provide for a minimum level of protection of children.
• Yet children need to be exposed to challenging situations if they are to develop normally. It is the task of planners, manufacturers and operators to provide these challenges in a suitable fashion in a low-risk environment.
  Equipment that offers clearly apparent hazards associated with considerable difficulties ‒ requiring children to climb to a height of 3 m, for example ‒ should not be banned from our playgrounds.

 

 

Image: eibe Produktion + Vertrieb GmbH & Co. KG