CONTACT US: Contact info
|
Citation |
Dain SJ, Ngo TP, Cheng BB, Hu A, Teh AG, Tseng J, Vu N. Ophthalmic. Physiol. Opt. 2010; 30(3): 253-256. |
|
Affiliation |
School of Optometry and Vision Science, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia. s.dain@unsw.edu.au |
|
Copyright |
(Copyright © 2010, John Wiley and Sons) |
|
DOI |
|
PMID |
20444131 |
|
Abstract |
PURPOSE: The Optics and Radiometry Laboratory (ORLAB) provides a testing service for the Australian sunglass industry to assist its compliance with the mandatory Consumer Product Safety Standard. In doing so, a number of sunglasses carrying the CE mark (in effect a claim of compliance with the European Union Personal Protective Equipment Directive) have been tested. Since there is no mandatory testing in Europe (the sunglass industry is deemed self regulating), evaluating their performance will give an insight into compliance with the Directive. METHODS: Consecutive submissions to ORLAB over a period of 18 months were examined for CE marked sunglasses. The results for 646 CE marked pairs of sunglasses tested during 2003 and first half 2004 were examined and evaluated for compliance with EN 1836 (the European sunglass standard) on the basis of refractive power, prismatic power, transmittance (visible, UV and coloration) and polarization. RESULTS: A total of 17.3% failed EN 1836 and 3.3% were borderline (i.e. within our uncertainties of measurement of the requirement). The failures comprised: 0.9% lens defect; 12.5% polarization alignment error; 2.7% excessive vertical prism; 22.3% excessive horizontal prism; 27.7% excessive spherical power; 14.3% excessive cylindrical power; 1.8% excessive UV transmittance; and 23.2% transmittance difference between lenses (always gradient tints). CONCLUSION: With up to 20% non-compliance, self regulation is not working particularly well in providing the public with complying sunglasses. Language: en |