Performance-Based Code New Technology and the Performance-Based Code by Louis Bialy and Davis L. Turner Worldwide Codes & Stan- dards for Ot Elevator Co. He is a rogistered profes- slonal engineer. Bly has more thin years of exper lence in the desig, dovel- ‘pment and testing of la- wr dustrial products and 2B years of experience in slovator and escalitor engineering, including 15 years in fl-cime codes-and-standards activites. Bialy is an active member of the ISO/TCI7B Plenary Committee, as well as several ISO work- ing groups. He is a member of the ASME AIT Standards Committee andi vice chair ofthe AIT Incermasional Standards Committee and AIT Mechanical Design Committee, and chair of the Navonal Elevator Industry, Inc. Central Code Committee. He also serves on the NAESA Iner- rational Board of Directors. lay has recelved rumerous industry awards and has been honored a an Otis fellow. He holds many patents in dhe ie and other industries Davis L. Turner is an dectrial engineer and a -é-year-phs veteran ofthe slerator industry. He began his carer with Oss in New York in the Construction Deparment 1988, Turaer joined Misubish Blerator Co, as vice president. In 1989, he was appointed president of the company. Under Turner's leader- ship, the company expanded into three sats. In 1996, Turner formed Davis L Turner & Associates, an Independent elevator consukng frm. He is 3 amber of the ASME Board of Safety Codes and Standards, A7 Sandards Committoe and Mechanical Design Committe and the fterna- ‘onal Standards Commitee, and chairman of the Escalator and Moving Walk Committe. Tuner is fon the Advisory Board of NAESA International anda member ofthe City of Los Angeles Board of Examiners for Elevator Constructors In a moment of historical signiti- cance for the vertical-transportation industry, the ASME A17.7-2007/CSA BAL7-O7 Perforumunce-Busel Safety Code for Elevators end Escalators (PBC) was. published by the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) in March 2007. Itis remarkable that this code was developed and published in a four-year timeframe, thus validat- ing the commitment of the North American elevator industry as a whole to the sprit of innovation, ‘while ensuring safety. Perhaps one of the greatest benefits of the PBC is its value to the enforcing authorities across the continent. It has long been recognized that there is an increasing demand for innovative products in the North ‘American arena, Priot to 2007, Section 1.2 of AI7.1 and B44 recognized this need and provided for the AH) and regulatory authorities to permit prod ucts determined to have safety levels equivalent to those required by the code. This section of the code has been used extensively to approve the deployment of many innovative ele- valor variations. However, the process has been difficult for elevator manu- facturers, AHJs and regulatory authori ties because each authority has to be approached individually and because how the information is presented is not consistent from manufacturer to manufacturer. From this standpoint the PBC constitutes great help to the authorities, as well as the manufac turers and installers of elevators. ‘The PBC provides a structured approach for introducing new tech- nology products to the marketplace ‘The approach is based on global essential safety requirements (GESRs) 76 | WWW.ELEVATOR.WORLD.COM | March 2010 that have to be met and a tisk- assessment process that ensures they are met. An accredited elevator/ excalalu! certification urgantization (AECO) (or the enforcing authority directly) will examine the process and certify the design if it is deemed to comply with the PBC. ‘The heart of the PBC is a set of GESRs based on ISO TS 2559-1. The PBC also includes a set of safety parameters (SPs) consistent with the ASME AI7.1/CSA B44 Safety Code for Elevators and Escalators. These SPS are intended to help users of the PBC satisfy the GESRs applicable to their particular design. The PBC requires that a risk assessment be carried out fon the design being evaluated to ensure that risks are identified and sulficiently mitigated. A risk-assessment methodology such as ISO 14798 or equivalent is required in order to verify compliance with the appli- cable GESRs. The risk assessment requires a balanced team of suitably qualified experts with a trained facil itator to conduct the study. The PBC describes the ISO TS 14798 method ology, provides a method for select- ing applicable GESRs and illustrates the entire process by means of a detailed example. To ensure that the process has been properly followed and that the hazards have been identified and addressed, the PBC requires that a code-compliance document (CCD) be produced. The CCD will include the risk assessment, design and test data, and information on the inspection and maintenance of the equipment. The CCD will be examined by an AECO and a certificate issued only when the AECO is satisfied that theA17.7/B44.7 code as been properly met. The AHJ can Iso directly examine the CCD and certify the design for its own jurisdiction AECOs are not-for-profit organizations with a high degree of technical competence. They are accredited by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) or Stan. dards Council of Canada (SCC) to a standard defined by the PBC. The accreditation includes a process of audit ing by the accrediting organizations. The AECOs, in turn, will audit certified designs to ensure compliance with the cep. lunteering Is Easy! Mec enn ators, escalators and moving walks through informat o Row! teers KS [aera Seca ase cosy ACC Dore nO aneeC ns avai ubac testo * oa Cees eter roar eon enn carat een Pee Te teen tly to the s ee [gO ero SUC ony 78 | WWW.ELEVATOR.WORLD.COM | March 2010 accra a nas ask EESF Teacher's Guide for step-by-step instructions In March 2009, ANSI accredited three organizations as AECOs: Underwriters Laboratories inc,, THV-SUD America Inc. and Liftinstituut Holdings, BV. Subsequently, TOV- SUD received accreditation as an AECO from SCC. well. This process provides a structured roadmap for new technology to enter the marketplace with cettifications for safety. The process and the PBC are fully endorsed by nationally recognized safety organizations in North America, such as NAESA International and the National Elevator Industry, Inc. (NEI) The PBC has been adopted by several AHJs and Regu- latory Authorities as a valuable tool to assist in safely deploying new technology products in their jurisdic tions. It is anticipated that the adop tion of the PBC will spread through- out other jurisdictions as its benelits become known. As a further point, the A17.1/B44 prescriptive code will be kept current as new technology becomes standard technology. The code modifications for machine-room- less elevators are an example of this, The introduction of the PBC brings with it new terms, acronyms and vo- cabulary. It would behoove all ex- perts involved in code enforcement and interpretation to be familiar with these new terms. To borrow a few of these terms (pethaps prematurely), we may want to ask: “Where do J, the AH) or inspector, fit into this new process? if manufacturers ate providing information to the AECOS in the form of CCDs containing GESR compliance criteria and SPs, how arc oar) we to perform our duties as Als and ' 4 inspectors?” Another might ask is he talking about?” This article is intended, in part, to help answer some of those questions about the PBC. A New Language? Many of the terms, phrases, acronyms and abbreviations used in the PBC are contained in Table | and appear in the preface to the Al7. 44,7 code. A brief explanation of each acronym is provided in Table 1, with examples where appropriate. Some of the terms are already familiar to us and part of our vocabulary. Tomy Saunt ‘What in the worldPerformance-Based Code A lot of interest has been generated by the publica- tion of the PBC. As a result, several articles relating to this code have been published in ELEVATOR WORLD, NAESA's Progress and other publications. This article was based on earlier articles in Progress by your authors Industry” by Louis Bialy (EW, September 2009). We wish to thank NAESA for its permission to publish portions previously published in Progress. Future articles on the PBC will cover more detail about the implementation of the PBC and help answer some frequently-asked and the article “Innovation with Safety in the Elevator COONS Sn 1 ‘AECO | Accredited ElevatorEscaator Certification Organization The AECO is accredited by ANSI or the SCC. ‘AHI Authority Having Jurisdiction (Regulatory Authority) | This the code enforcement body and has th ‘Also se the definition of Regulatory Authority” i questions, e weaning as defined in A17.1 17.1844, ANS! American National Standards Institute ‘The highest standards-accrediting body in te U.S. and one ofthe bodies that has zecredited the AECOs ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers CCD Code-Compliance Document This is prepared by the manufacturer (applicant) and reviewed by the AECO andlor the AR. Publisher ofthe PBO, A17.71844.7 ‘hes? devices have the meaning as used in AY7.4 GSA Canadian Standards Association EPD __ Electrical Protective Device EN | European Norms FMEA | Failure Modes and Effects Analysis FOS | Factor of Safety FTA Fault Tree Analysis Global Essential Safety Requirement ‘A method of analyzing wat happens winen Murphy's Law takes effec. The PBC will contin a list ofthese requirements GESR HA | Hazard Analysis ‘A systematic method of analyzing the degree and probability ofthe occurrence ofa hazard | 180 Intemational Standards Organization KE | Kinetic Energy LcU | Load-Carrying Unit (Car) _ MCP | Maintenance Control Program Thisis from A17.1a/B44a ~ 2005 2008, Requirement 86.1.2.1 MOSAR | Method Organized for Systematic Analysis of Risk PBC | Performance-Based Code ASME A17 7/0SA 844.7 PES | Programmable Electronic System PHA | Preliminary Hazard Analysis RA Risk Assessment ‘A systematic method of assessing the severity and probability of the ‘currence ofa risk (See "HA" above and “S/P” below.) cc | Standards Council of Canada “The highest standards-accrediting body in Canada and one ofthe bodies that secrets AFCO SiL__| Safety Intogrty Level SP | Safety Parameter Used with Programmable Electronic Systems (PES) Usualy a quantitative value such as a distance, force, pressure or rate of aczoeration See * ‘An estimate of the degree of harm that can be caused by a hazardous station in the Risk Assessment and "P* below. a | Seerty/robabity S| Severity ‘An estimate ofthe likelihood ofa risk of vel "S" occurring Probability Technical Committee Ultimate Tensile Strength ‘An engineering term describing the strength ofa material often used as an SP urs Table 1 80 | WWW.ELEVATOR-WORLD.COM | March 2010