LASER waning sing

[mccarrot]

the ELA and the new 10x MPE norm ILDA is working on are talking about the need to have signs placed at the door and other places people can see to warn there is a high power laser in use and warn people to not look into the beams.

Are there already such signs or clip art available?

When you look at the 10x MPE document they are talking about warning or caution signs, but when the value is above MPE you should use Danger sign. this confuses me a bit.
Also do they need to be yellow or white?

the ELA also states you need the laser power and type written on the signs.

[gottaluvlasers]

I *JUST* uploaded a sign that i made to my FTP server.

youre welcome to it. (its for a a 532nm laser) if you need a sign for a diff type of laser, lemme know.

-Marc

CLASS 4 DANGER

[mccarrot]

Nice sign, but isn't this a sign to put on the projector itself?

I'm looking for a sign to place at the entrance of a club for example, to inform the audiance there is a high power laser in use.

Here is a quote from the 10xMPE audiance scanning document you can find at ILDA.com

quote:
A Level 2 show must post signage with wording such as “Caution: Extra-bright laser lights in
use. Avoid direct exposure to beams.”21 If audio announcements are normally made before the
event (such as at a concert), then there must also be an audio warning to the audience that
“Extra-bright lasers will be used. Do not stare directly into the beams.”22

ELA regulations says the folowing:

1. The laser operator must ensure that members of the public are warned not to use opera glasses, binoculars or other optical aids (N.B. Prescription lenses are not a hazard).

and

1. Each entrance to the Control Area must have a sign clearly visible displaying the laser warning symbol and stating 'Danger, Laser Radiation, Authorised Personnel Only'.

So I think I'm looking at a sighn with the folowing text:

Caution: Extra-bright laser lights in
use. Avoid direct exposure to beams
not to use opera glasses, binoculars or other optical aids

And I thinkit should look something like this:



What is you thought?

[Insanity]

Is this what you mean?

warning.jpg

I made these myself and also another type that says 'Laser Hazzard' to be placed in equipment areas... These are the same as those used with approval of John O'Hagan (NRPB) at shows I worked on...

I can't find the original, but I'll see if I can scan one somehow when I get time... Failing that, it is easy to download the hazzard logo, enlarge it and tidy it up. I did mine in PowerPoint...

Mark

[Jem]

Try these.

I also have them with a plain white background for printing on bright yellow card.

Cheers

Jem

[White-Light]

I made one a while ago - seems to have disappeared off the server so I'm reloading.

So you can just change the Power, Frequencies and Class to whatever you need:

Ordinary Warning Sign:

ftp://plftp:ildaswap@ftp.photonlexicon.com/public/Aspect Locked -Laser Emmission Warning Labels.pub

Its a Microsoft Publisher Document and fully editable.


Now Added, possible 10x MPE warning Sign at A3 size:

I've included a camera warning as well as 10x MPE compliance (note relies on ILDA approving the standard and you implementing it as it says its compliant).

ftp://plftp:ildaswap@ftp.photonlexicon.com/public/10 x MPE Warning.pdf


PS. These are suggested formats only. I accept no liability for an inadequacy. The onus is on you to ensure they fit your needs and or any legal requirements.

[mccarrot]

Wow I like it White-light!

Thank you.

I would leave the text "Complaint with ILDA 10x MPE Safety Standard" out of this document.

Visitors who need to read this sign don't care about MPE

[cyberb0b]

Here also i have something

[mccarrot]

Thank you all for your reply's.

Exept I think caution signs need to be yellow so I made my own with the input of you guys.

Please tell me what you think.

[JimBo]

You have spelt except wrong. There is a C in it.

Jim

[gashead]

You have spelt except wrong. There is a C in it.

Jim

Second Camera is spelt wrong too

Anyway - great thread - lots of choices here all seem to get the point across!

[norty303]

'Ordinary' has too many 'I's in your version

[White-Light]

I've made another one taking your points on board McCarrot. Still at A3:

[mccarrot]

I have corrected the spelling in my previous sign.

What do you think about this sign I made:

[mccarrot]

Or this one:

I also have simplified the text. is this better?

[FourDee]

Damn even I'd be afraid when I saw one of those signs

[mccarrot]

Damn even I'd be afraid when I saw one of those signs

Yes, you got a point.
We need to make people aware there are high power lasers in use without scaring them off. Any ideas?

[mccarrot]

is this better

[cyberb0b]

Than i like this one more

[White-Light]

I'd avoid the wording in that one - stating it exceeds maximum allowable exposure is inviting law suits. Plus its not strictly true because the new standard if agreed, takes MPE up to 10x the previous MPE level but by doing so sets a new MPE level so the exposure is permissible under the new rules if you get what I mean,

is this better

Love it.

Can see some quiet raves though with those up.

[mccarrot]

I'd avoid the wording in that one - stating it exceeds maximum allowable exposure is inviting law suits.

I have removed the text.

[mccarrot]

a more friendly sign:

[cyberb0b]

I thing that you need to include the official iso logo .. this one:

[greenalien]

'Ordinary prescription spectacles' can include high-magnification (convex) lenses, prescribed for people with long sight (Hypermetropia). These will increase beam strength significantly, depending on the degree of correction. Surely all MPE measurements become totally irrelevant if you are doing audience scanning and even one member of the audience is wearing such spectacles? Has ILDA even thought of this as a problem? Any research? Could there be scope for banning long-sighted people from laser shows in the same way that epileptics should avoid strobe lighting? More questions than answers...

[FourDee]

Isn't the point of prescription spectacles that the vision and the ulitmate result on the retina of the person wearing them will be (close to) identical to somebody who has perfect vision.

I don't think they pose a problem for the retina. The cornea maybe, but I'm no expert on that matter ...