UIAA vs CE ratings

[mtnwarrior]

Am I correct in saying that UIAA and CE (or CEN) ratings are now almost identical due to the fact that the UIAA wrote the CE standard? If a company has signed off on the the CE standard, saying they conform to the standard, and are ISO 9001 certified, that should testify to the quality of their manufacturing, correct? I know that UIAA does testing before they stamp vs the company testing their own. But have also heard that they are overly expensive, hence why alot of companies prefer to just conform to CE rather than being stamped by UIAA. Am I close here?

[GearGuy]

OK, you asked, so here goes:

You see the ubiquitous “CE” stamp on everything from toasters to toys to computer monitors to sexual aids. Founded in the early 1990s by the European Economic Community to prevent inferior goods from crossing international borders, the “CE” establishes standards for products sold in countries that belong to the European Union, which includes most of the ones you can think of. Climbing gear falls under the CE umbrella and must meet certain safety standards.

Bear in mind, the CE disseminates requirements, but doesn’t invent them. That task is left to the UIAA. According to Dave Custer, the U.S. and Canadian delegate to the UIAA, the UIAA drafts testing protocol and standards, and the CE “rubber-stamps them” for its use. Like the UIAA, the CE itself does not test gear. Rather, it accredits independent labs to carry out testing, then issues certificates for products that pass. A final, important fact is that the CE requires manufacturers to evaluate quality, by retesting product every year, or conforming to ISO, a quality-assurance program.

CE certification is required to sell goods in CE member nations, but the United states does not mandate certification for climbing equipment. But, since most U.S. manufacturers do sell in Europe, most U.S. products are CE certified, which is an expensive process.

How critical is CE certification?

“Some kind of norm helps reassure consumers,” says Mark Twight, of Grivel North America, which imports Italian-made ice gear into the United States. “Without norms in Europe or the threat of litigation in the U.S., you’d see a lot of junk on the market.” But, argues Twight, “The CE tests aren’t always realistic—for the crampon test they use a static load rather than flex the crampon, as you would in real life. Because the test isn’t realistic, the certification doesn’t mean much.”

Don Bushey of the Denver retail climbing shop, Wilderness Exchange Unlimited, says he considers “brand reputation” over CE. His customers, he says, never ask about CE, and the lack of CE approval doesn’t affect his decision about what gear he carries. “CE certification doesn’t guarantee a thing,” says Bushey. “We’ve seen CE-certified carabiners arrive, new, with cracked gates.”

Bottom line: CE certification suggests quality, but can’t guarantee it, and the absence of a CE stamp on American goods doesn’t imply shoddy quality, either. Reputable manufacturers almost always build their products to meet or exceed CE standards. These products would be CE compliant, they just don’t have the CE stamp because they aren’t distributed in Europe.

The UIAA
This venerable international climbing federation, formed in 1932, established the first safety standards for climbing gear. Today, the UIAA continues in this role, with various standards for ropes, cord and slings, harnesses, helmets, carabiners and rock and ice pro, and is currently developing standards for belay and rappel devices.

Functionally, the UIAA is the working group that defines climbing standards for the CE. “The UIAA is an important organization,” says Steve Hudson of PMI ropes out of Georgia, “because it’s the one place where American manufacturers can vote on regulations. At the CE, we can’t even attend meetings without an invitation … it’s very Eurocentric.”

Because the UIAA is manned by climbers, and manufacturers from Europe and the United States sit on the board, this group has its finger on the pulse of climbing, and can identify gaps and needs. It can then draft better or new equipment standards, which may or may get adopted by the CE. The UIAA standard for sheath slippage for ropes, for instance, is tougher than the CE’s regulation. The UIAA also has a minimum rope-bearing radius for carabiners—the CE does not. In short, UIAA standards are, overall, a smidge more stringent than those of the CE.

Prior to the CE, climbing manufacturers exclusively used UIAA standards. But, since the CE requirements approximate those of the UIAA, many companies opt for CE only, believing the voluntary UIAA-certification redundant. “There really is limited benefit to certify to both,” says Kolin Powick of the Salt Lake City based gear manufacturer Black Diamond.

Exceptions to the CE-only rule abound among rope manufacturers—virtually all ropes still carry the UIAA label, if for no other reason than fear that climbers might not purchase a non-UIAA-certified rope.
“Historically, the UIAA label has been expected for ropes,” says Scott Newell of the Georgia-based BlueWater.

Think of the UIAA stamp as the Good Houskeeping seal of approval for climbing gear. Regardless of whether you understand how equipment is tested and what the litany of hodge-podge of hangtag numbers mean, you know that if that gear bears the UIAA seal, it conforms to the most stringent international standards available.

3-SIGMA

3-Sigma is a statistical quality control method to rate ultimate product strength. 3-Sigma is relevant because without it, you have no idea how the manufacturer derived the strength rating. Could be an average, could be a derivation of 3-Sigma. With 3-Sigma, you know the exact formula used to calculate the rated strength (see sidebar), and can accurately compare product X to product Y, assuming both are 3-Sigma rated. “Three Sigma provides truth in ratings,” says Rob Nadau of Omega Pacific, a Washington-based hardware manufacturer that uses 3-Sigma.

3-Sigma “Gives us a level of confidence that our product will meet or exceed its given ‘ultimate-strength’ rating,” says Powick of Black Diamond. “Basically, by maintaining a 3-Sigma value, it tells us that 99.87 percent of the product we produce will be above the product rating.”

Yet 3-Sigma, impressive as it is, may not be the gold standard. “Consumers should understand that manufacturers are trying to justify what’s an acceptable rate of failure,” says Joe Garland, a longtime gear designer, manufacturer and distributor. “For some manufacturers, three out of a thousand breaking below the rated strength isn’t acceptable, and they use a formula that is actually tougher than 3-Sigma.” Since, according to Garland, these formulas don’t have marketable names like 3-Sigma, you never hear about them. “While there’s nothing wrong with 3-Sigma,” says Garland, “It isn’t necessarily any better than other methods.”

Another point to keep in mind, says Nadau, is that, like any rating, 3-Sigma is driven by the number of test samples, “and the manufacturer can test as many or as few as it likes.” One company might break three samples, while another might break a hundred. A higher test sampling yields a statistically more accurate picture, but one that you, the end user, aren’t privy to. According to Nadau, Omega Pacific breaks 10,000 carabiners a year, and even though it uses 3-Sigma, “We downgrade the number to add in an additional cushion.” He recommends that besides 3-Sigma, you “look at the company’s reputation, where the product is made, and their level of customer service,” then factor these into your purchasing decision.

To arrive at a 3-Sigma rating, a manufacturer takes product samples, test them to destruction using CE and/or their own internal quality-control procedures. Next, they take the standard deviation, a complicated calculation based upon the spread of the results, multiply this by three (for 3 Sigma), and subtract that number from the average. Easy.

To better understand 3 Sigma: Say a carabiner’s average strength is 5,000 pounds and the standard deviation is 100 pounds. To get to 3-Sigma, multiply the 100-pound deviation by three, and subtract this number, 300, from the average strength of 5,000. The 3-Sigma rating is 4,700 pounds. Statistically, a maximum of three carabiners out of a thousand will break below 4,700 pounds. Keep in mind that just because a carabiner—or any piece of gear breaks below its rated strength doesn’t make it dangerous. In most cases the rated strength so exceeds the CE requirement, the gear can break below the rating and still pass CE.

ISO

ISO is a non-governmental, international organization that works with makers of any product to develop systematic approaches to manufacturing. ISO has several levels of certification. The ISO “9000” series applies to the climbing world.

Rather that serve as a product rating, ISO is a company rating. It is a quality-management system, and not a safety standard that applies to a particular piece of equipment. ISO simply means that a manufacturer has a quality-control standard, and every product that company makes will meet the standard it sets.

While the ISO itself does not establish manufacturing standards (that is left to each company), it has protocols to which companies must adhere. For instance, ISO companies must carefully document their manufacturing from A-to-Z. This detailed paper trail helps the company track its progress and repeat or improve its processes, helping guarantee that the carabiner X or cam X or built today will be (nearly) identical to one built a year from now.

What ISO doesn’t do “Is necessarily make your company turn out a higher-quality product,” says Nadau of Omega. “If you are making rubber dog doo, ISO simply guarantees that the dog doo you are making today is equal in quality to the product you’ll make in the future. If that product is B-grade now, it will remain B-grade. Ideally, an ISO-certified company will use the wealth of information it compiles to improve their product.”

Next!

[mtnwarrior]

Thanks that was perfect and obviously well researched.

[Himalaya]

On thing that remained unanswered is that the UIAA Safety Certification for a product category costs 20 Euros vis-a-vis CE certification which is nearly 50 Euros. Therefore the assumption that UIAA certification is costly, is wrong!

BTW, you can see all the UIAA certified equipment online using this search function here

http://safety.theuiaa.org/front/index_public.php

Keep climbing, keep happy!

[jim titt]

To clarify a few points in GearGuys post:
The CE mark is carried by products that conform to the standards (European Norm or EN) issued by CENORM, an organisation composed primarily of the national standards bodies of the European Community.
Overseas manufacturers can make representation to CENORM via their trade association or seperately.
The test certificate for EN is valid through a products lifetime, it is the UIAA who require annual testing.

The UIAA Safety Label (the UIAA is not an recognised standards authority)is losing its relevance for manufacturers for a number of reasons:-
Expensive debacles such as the rope sharp edge test.
Failed `standards´ i.e. the abseil and belay device.
The tendency for the UIAA technical commitee to tell manufacturers how to design products rather than set parameters for manufacturers to work within.
The UIAA are perceived in some quarters as abusing their position in order to increase their income and usually wait for an EN to be issued (which they contributed to) and then issue new requirements over and above these. These tend to be practically meaningless but allow the UIAA to claim the `gold standard´. That the UIAA obtain a proportion of their income from the Safety Labels makes it hard to believe they are acting solely in the interests of climbers safety.

The last post from Himalaya is ridiculous.
The cost for certification for CE varies with the product depending on the complexity of the test and the individual testing laboratory. As an example the cost for a pull test to EN959 (rock anchors) being €1863.00 at my local German test laboratory. The additional testing to the requirements of the UIAA would be circa €600.00 and to be awarded the UIAA Safety Label a yearly payment of €1200.00 is levied. As noted above, the certification (testing)has to be repeated every year.
The UIAA do NOT certify anything, this may only be done by an accredited independent certification test facility or, in the case of certain products, by the manufacturers themselves.

Jim Titt
Bolt Products
Germany

[robert22]

If a UIAA or CE standard exists for the given type of equipment. This rating generally applies to the technical equipment used in climbing walls: ropes etc.

________________________
156-315 practice exam
000-223 practice exam
JN0-303 practice exam

[Himalaya]

In response to Jim / Bolt Products (GER)

Argument 1: The test certificate for EN is valid through a products lifetime, it is the UIAA who require annual testing.

Answer 1: The UIAA does not always require annual testing. In fact it never has been in the recent past. This is possible when a manufacturer has in place a Quality Management System similar or equal to CE 11A / 11B or ISO 9001:2000. In such a scenario a test report is only to be submitted every 3 years which is fair considering that the nature of product can be altered (for ex. to make it safer by studying accidents).

Argument 2: The UIAA Safety Label (the UIAA is not an recognized standards authority)is losing its relevance for manufacturers for a number of reasons.

Answer 2: If statistics are to be believed, the number of UIAA Certifications (both the no. of manufacturers as well as labels) have grown. But lets talk about your concerns -

Research work and building a standard is not just the work of the commission of UIAA but also involves active participation of the manufacturers in a working group. This is truly the role of UIAA, to facilitate, rather than impose. If you've had a bad experience, please state more explicitly.

Argument 3: Abuse of power

Answer 3: Please write to the UIAA office for a break-up of the budget from the Safety Label Certification. A majority is apportioned to research for various working groups. Please keep in mind that the UIAA works with unpaid but passionate volunteers as against CEN. How can you imagine it to be not working solely in the interests of climbers and mountaineers is beyond my comprehension?

Argument 4: The cost for certification

Answer 4: A person who bears the cost, best knows it. However, there are some anomalies in your facts. Cost of certification is made up of different components like - Purchase of a standard (EN or UIAA) + cost of testing the equipment (in a lab/ notified body as per CE). Leaving all other costs incurred by a manufacturer aside, lets talk about these two.

An EN standard cost is based on the no. of pages the standard is. An average cost for an EN standard is 50 Euros, whereas the same for UIAA is 20 Euros.

Similarly a membership to attend CE meeting costs approx 1200 Euros, whereas for UIAA it is 300 Euros.

Even if some UIAA standards have additonal requirement over and above in the EN, not all require testing (meaning incurring costs). For example for CHOCKS with textile attachment > additional requirement is> where threads in the load bearing parts are visible, at least 50% of the visible area of stitching shall contrast with the tape in color. Such a requirement was voted upon in the meeting, agreed and included. The UIAA acts in good faith to make equipment safer.

5 out of 19 UIAA standards require additional laboratory testing and thus an additional expense. Please go to the UIAA website and read more.


Argument 5: The UIAA does not certify anything

Answer 5: It is very important to understand that The UIAA is an International Forum, not limited to Europe, Americas or Asia etc. Its primary role is to bring together people to accept a common understanding of where the development of climbing equipment is going vis-a-vis aspects of safety. The UIAA reserves the right to reject an application for certification, so it is a certifying body in all aspects. Only that such certification is not legally binding on any manufacturer and is entirely voluntary. It ensures some breathing space for everyone!

Safety Commission meetings of UIAA are open to observers. The next one is in Belluna, Italy in 2010.


** The views expressed here are solely my own and I've tried to be as close to facts as possible. **

[john574]

Glade to visit this unique forum. I hope that you will soon arrange the forum regarding ibm exam questions and about the other important terms and certificate such as isaca exam questions but there is no candle in front the isc exam questions. But to attain this one is a hard nut to crack.