PD ISO TR 11071 — Comparison of Worldwide Lift Safety Standards (ISO/TR 11071 Series)

🛗 PD ISO/TR 11071 is a BSI Published Document implementing ISO/TR 11071 in the UK, developed by Technical Committee MHE/4 (Lifts, hoists and escalators). The series addresses the “comparison of worldwide lift safety standards“, item by item comparing the similarities and differences between the lift safety standards of the world’s major economies (Europe, North America, Japan, etc.). This batch covers two parts: Part 1 (Electric lifts, i.e. traction elevators) and Part 2 (Hydraulic lifts). Through terminology comparison, clause-by-clause comparison, and background explanations, both parts provide valuable reference for lift manufacturers, inspection bodies, and standards users seeking to understand “why national standards differ and how they can be mutually recognised”.

1. Series Background and Positioning 📌

Lift safety standards have followed different development paths in different regions. Europe is represented by the EN 81 series, emphasising hazard analysis and functional safety requirements; North America by ASME A17.1/CSA B44, using prescriptive design and inspection requirements; Japan has the JIS system combined with building regulations. Owing to differences in history, regulatory systems, and safety philosophy, these standards differ in terminology, safety device requirements, test methods, and acceptance limits.

ISO/TR 11071 compares these standards clause by clause and explains the differences. Part 1 (second edition 2004) compares standards for electric lifts, covering terminology, safety devices, electrical safety devices and protective devices, safety gear, and speed governors; Part 2 (second edition 2006) compares standards for hydraulic lifts, covering design safety of hydraulic components, driving machines and jacks (plungers and cylinders), valves/piping/fittings, protection against free-fall, excessive speed, and creeping. The UK versions are published by BSI as Published Documents, noted as “reproduces verbatim” the ISO originals.

2. Series File List 📋

The PD ISO/TR 11071 series technical report files covered in this batch are listed below.

3. Comparison of Electric Lift Standards (Part 1) 🔧

Part 1 compares safety requirements for electric-driven lifts, mainly including:

• Terminology and basic assumptions: compares definitions of lift, safety device, electrical safety device, etc., and the basic assumptions (failure modes, risk levels) underlying each national standard.
• Electrical safety devices and electrical protective devices: compares how electrical safety circuits, door interlocks, limits, and over-speed protection are expressed and limited in each standard.
• Safety gear and speed governors: compares the types, triggering conditions, and test requirements of safety gear, and the setting and operating conditions of speed governors.
• Well, machine room, and car requirements: compares well dimensions, mechanical strength, car construction, and safety-space clauses.

Through item-by-item comparison, Part 1 reveals the “common safety objectives behind surface differences” in national standards, helping manufacturers grasp core requirements when conforming to multiple standards.

4. Comparison of Hydraulic Lift Standards (Part 2) 💧

Hydraulic lifts are driven by hydraulic cylinders and pump stations, so their safety requirement focus differs from traction lifts. Part 2 comparison content includes:

• Design safety approach for hydraulic components: compares how each country treats hydraulic system failure modes (e.g. pipe rupture, seal failure, oil temperature rise) and safety redundancy requirements.
• Driving machines and jacks (plungers and cylinders): compares the arrangement of driving stations and the strength and test requirements of plungers and cylinders.
• Valves, piping, and fittings: compares safety requirements for check valves, relief valves, shut-off valves, and pipe connections to prevent accidental re-leveling descent and overpressure.
• Ropes and chains, capacity and loading, protection against free-fall, excessive speed and creeping: compares clauses on mechanical suspension, load limits, and protection against uncontrolled descent.

Unique risks of hydraulic lifts include descent caused by loss of cylinder pressure and uncontrolled lowering due to pipe rupture; the Part 2 comparison helps understand how different countries control these risks through different means.

5. Engineering Practice Applications 🛠️

• Multi-market product development: lift manufacturers use the comparison tables to plan product designs for multiple national markets, identifying design and test items that must be satisfied simultaneously.
• Certification and mutual-recognition review: inspection and certification bodies cite the series to assess consistency between different national certifications, supporting mutual-recognition arrangements (e.g. consultation documents between the EU and the US).
• Input to standards development: experts involved in revising national standards use the comparisons to identify differences and promote harmonisation of global lift safety standards.
• Technical and procurement communication: when projects involve equipment from multiple countries, use a unified comparison basis to communicate safety requirements.

A typical application path: identify the target markets and applicable standards → use the Part 1/Part 2 comparison tables to identify differences → make design supplements and testing for the differences → complete conformity assessment against multiple standards → issue the certification documents for the respective markets.

6. Frequently Asked Questions ❓