1

I am researching guidelines and considerations with respect to user safety when designing commercially sold products that contain user-operated machinery and moving parts (I.e. motors, pulleys, magnetic locks, etc). My objective for this work is to gain a better understanding of how to address potential hazards and determine if and under what circumstances any mitigations are needed to protect the user. The context to this with which I am concerned is when a user may misuse a product either unintentionally or unknowingly. Considerations for safety design feasibility (is it actually possible to do, will it cost too much, etc.) and legal obligation/protection by the user are also important. Can it simply be a matter of including an operating manual, which also lists specific do's and dont's?

A very simplistic example would be the operation of an automobile door window. Specifically an instance where a child or unaware individual could have their fingers or a whole limb caught in the vehicle window as it is rolling up. How can this potential hazard be classified as being of the user’s responsibility or the system’s? Are there any recognized standards or guidelines that are available to reference regarding safety design and hazard mitigation particularly for controversial misuse by the end user?

I should also mention, and to my best understanding, that the types of systems I am referring to have a level of hazard that categorizes as a major hazard, where they may result in physical injury of the user.

I would like to ask the community for help regarding these ideas, and to shed some light on how to approach assessing the need for designing additional costly safety features to mitigate potential user misuse of a product.

Pholotic
  • 11
  • 1
  • Yes, you imagine the most stupid way something can be (mis)- used and design to avoid it. – Solar Mike Jul 03 '21 at 14:20
  • ISO 14971 covers this for medical devices - I imagine there is an industrial equivalent. – Jonathan R Swift Jul 03 '21 at 16:08
  • Before both the design and the users/operation manual are complete, and the product is approved for commercial use, I don't think the company can get away with liability issues shall anything bad happens during the test drive of the product. – r13 Jul 03 '21 at 16:09
  • And, anecdotally, no user ever reads the manual. If the outcome of the misuse is simply the device doesn't work, that's OK to explain in the IFU, but if there is a risk of harm, then the IFU is not sufficient as a mitigation. – Jonathan R Swift Jul 03 '21 at 16:10
  • @SolarMike: Sometimes no matter how much one tries, the "genius" of idiots still manages to circumvent well intentioned, well designed & well made items in the elusive quest for a Darwin Award. – Fred Jul 03 '21 at 16:20
  • You state, "... the need for designing additional costly safety features ...". One of the issues about additional costly features is will the potential customer want to buy an expensive item when a cheaper one will do what they want. If it is too expensive the customer may decided not to buy & the business doesn't make a sale. There is always an element of risk with everything. I agree with reducing risk & making things safer but there is always a limit to what can be done. I would like to see manufacturers make items that contain button lithium batteries which cannot be removed by ... – Fred Jul 03 '21 at 16:35
  • ... small children who then swallow them either causing them serious injury or death. – Fred Jul 03 '21 at 16:36
  • 3
    This is much to broad and vague to be answerable IMO. – alephzero Jul 03 '21 at 16:39
  • Different industries or product categories have different unwritten rules, or possibly case law, for what it means to have reasonsble precautions vs user being harmed. Kitchen equipment, for instance, would draw the line differently from IT equipment. So I would agree with alephzero... – Pete W Jul 03 '21 at 18:15
  • You may find it interesting to read up on the body of technique known as "poka-yoke", and also on the early career of Ralph Nader. –  Jul 05 '21 at 20:07
  • If you make something idiot-proof, nature will only invent a better quality idiot. – StainlessSteelRat Jul 10 '21 at 00:34

0 Answers0