Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Consumer Product Safety: bicycle

Consumer Product Safety: bicycle

Ratings: (0)|Views: 271|Likes:
Published by CPSC

More info:

Published by: CPSC on Jan 27, 2008
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission
SUBJECT: ASTM F08.10 Bicycle Subcommittee MeetingDATE OF MEETING: May 22-23,2007LOG ENTRY SOURCE: VJADATE OF LOG ENTRY: May 31,2007LOCATION: Norfolk, VACPSC ATTENDEE(S): Vincent J. AmodeoNON-CPSC ATTENDEE(S):Name CompanyCory Sutela SramMark Rhomberg SramWes Fleming Pacific CycleMarty Wilke HuffyDave Duff HuffyPatrick Logan K Ridley TechnologyMatthew Pfeffer TrekStefan Berggren TrekTom Nieri CannondaleDavid Montague MontagueDavid Campbell CannondaleBob Burns TrekGerry Bretting CID, IncJohn Bogler CID, lncBud Kisamore CannondaleScott Dague CannondaleJim Veach Cannondale
Sylvie Alteirac Mavic-SalomonThom Parks Easton BellSam Pickman SpecializedSUMMARY OF NIEE'TING:ASTM F08 (Sports Equipment) Bike Sub-committee MeetingPoints of OrderChair Dave Mitchell was not able to attend. The role of Chair was filled by PatrickLogan.Secretary John Platt was not able to attend. The role of secretary was filled byCory Sutela.ISOnAG updatePresented by Stefan BerggrenIS0 has agreed to renew their existing standards for another
years. They mayadopt the new CEN standards; the timiug for that is
years out. Don Wright, thechair of ISO, has stepped down. His replacement isAllan Kator, incidentally alsofrom ,the UK with experience working with Raleigh.CEN news:Standards for BMX and for bike trailers are expected in 2008. Work is being doneon a standard for electric bikes.Some changes to the racing bicycle standard are in review with an advisoryboard, including to handlebars, fork impact, and crank tests. There is somethought within the CEN group and European testers that the current tests may betoo severe, a sentiment echoed by some members of this ASTIM sub-committee.No changes are being contemplated for the brake standard. It was noted that thewetldry ratio criteria can be difficult to meet for some brakes.Mr. Berggren observed that new CEN standards, as well as revisions, can actuallybe pushed though quite quickly,
tlie order of 1 year, very quickly relative toASTM F08.10 corrtmittee. 'The reason for this is because the CEN groups arerelatively well resourced with motivated members from companies who have paidto participate in the process.Wheels Group
Led by David MontagueThe latest revision of the quick release-secondary retention system test standardwas distributed. To summarize the main differences compared to previousproposals, the current proposal does not specify the operation of a secondaryretention system; rather it simply calls out a test for its performance. Changedprohibited QRs to 20" wheeled bikes.The proposed test consists of a 200N "pullout force" on the wheel, and a 100Nside load applied sequentially in 2 directions at the circumference of the wheel.Since it had been observed that the geometry of fork dropouts and QRs can varybetween sides, the test specifies that the side load should be applied sequentiallyin both directions (ie parallel to the wheel axle, in both directions). Then thewheel should be removed and rotated 180-deg about an axis perpendicular to theaxle (ie, run the wheel backwards) and the test repeated. The test should beperformed on a complete fork since different results were obtained when lowerlegs were tested on their own. Proof testing was performed by Montague and CIDynamics.The proposed wheel retention test standard was reviewed line-by-line. At theconclusion of the session Mr. lblontague agreed to revise the proposal as per thesuggestions of the group, and circulate the revised document to the Wheelsgroup. It was noted that the deadline for the next ASTM ballot is July 31,2007. Itwas further observed that full acceptance of this standard is not a pre-requisitefor manufacturers to spec QRs for production.FramesLed by Patrick LoganThere were 2 negatives expressed on the last ballot for the frame test standard.Both were deemed persuasive.The first negative referred to the allowed sequence of tests, in a case when thesame frame is to be used for multiple tests. The group agreed that plasticdeformation caused during an impact test can indeed affect the fatigue life during,future tests, in a way that is not predictable. 'Therefore, an impact test will not beallowed before a fatigue test.The second negative referred to the lack of a precision and bias (P&B) statementin the standard.The ASTM has a service to support the generation of P&B statements, and willpay for the samples (but not the testing) required to create them. The action itemhere is for Patrick to contact Philip Godorov of the ASTM's Inter-Lab StudyGroup, pgodorov@?astm.org or more support.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->