UL Certified Ebikes
- Thread starter Tobes2718
- Start date
In some cases (some of those that have listed in the NBDA database) they have provided a link to a dropbox with copies of the certificates (that link if included is in the gray section to the right) I like the idea of going direct to the certifier website link of course where available
Mr Jilani:
is the primary difference between UL 2849 and UL 2271 that 2849 includes the entire electrical system? That is, does 2849 basically replicate 2271 battery construction requirements and electrical and physical tests, then add on more requirements and tests for the remainder of the electrical system (BMS, controller, charger, wiring)? Or does 2849 have more tests for the battery itself as well?
And can you point me to a side by side comparison of EN 15194 and UL 2849 viz electrical fire safety? (I have yet to find public free access to the European document)
Tom Lent
Thanks
Fire_Safety
Member
- Region
- USA
Hi Tom,
My apologies for the late reply.
UL 2849 covers the electrical system of an e-bike and the integration of the various components to make the system. It evalautes and tests to the forseeable use and misuse of an ebike. Over 20 companies are voting members on its requirements coming from electrical system makers, component makers, end-users, and other stakeholders. An infographic UL Solutions has published on UL 2849 is available here.
UL Enterprise Applauds New York City Mayor Eric Adams for Signing Life-Saving Micromobility Legislation into Law
The new law addresses the significant safety risks that have emerged as the use of electrified forms of transportation surges.
UL 2271 solely looks at the light EV battery pack and the component's construction, design, material, and test requirements. It does not take into account final end product but does cover general requirements that is expected in a light EV application. It also has a Technical Committee with over 30 companies as voting members. A UL 2271 certified battery pack can not and should not replace a end-product or electrical system and its certification such as UL 2849 for e-bikes or UL 3300 for consumer/commercial robots.
Finally for a comparison of UL 2849 and EN 15194, UL Solutions Europe team did put a webinsr out 2 years ago. It's slightly outdated but bulk of how they compare are in the webinar's content.
Comparison of e-Bikes Standards: EN 15194 and UL 2849
Gain insight into key considerations when planning to enter the EU and North American markets with e-bikes, and the differences between EN 15194 and UL 2849.
Art Deco
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Selinsgrove Pennsylvania
This may have already been mentioned, but it appears that the Shimano Steps motor, battery, and controller are UL listed or certified as a 3 piece system for ebikes. That system is used in several commercial ebikes. Anyone familiar with it?
tomjasz
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Minnesnowta
Interesting. A vendor claims to be a Pedego battery supplier but also tells me that UL certification is too expensive and they have none. I wonder who's the bullshitter...
Intersting! Can you direct to me where you learned that Shimano Steps is certified. I'm coming up empty handed in google search. Would love to add it to my listing https://www.climateaction.center/safety-certifications if it is indeed certified. And as you note that would make a number of brands/models certified by their use of the system.
Fire_Safety
Member
- Region
- USA
Shimano does not come up on UL’s certification listing database.
- Here are the existing Listee companies that have ULS Listed e-Bikes: https://productiq.ulprospector.com/en/search?term=qgns
- Here are the existing Listee companies that have ULS Listed e-Scooters & e-Mobility Devices: https://productiq.ulprospector.com/en/search?term=fkis
- Here are the existing Listee companies that have ULS Listed Light EV Batteries: https://productiq.ulprospector.com/en/search?term=bbca
- Here are the existing Listee companies that have ULS Recognized Light EV Batteries: https://productiq.ulprospector.com/en/search?term=bbca2
Art Deco
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Selinsgrove Pennsylvania
My understanding is Pedego is not UL CERTIFIED AS A SYSTEM.
Sorry about the shouting but I am really trying to figure this out.
Fire_Safety
Member
- Region
- USA
Pedego does not show up as UL Certified at the links shared. If there are advertisements of UL Certified coming from any company who doesn’t show up on UL’s certification directory please report that at this link: https://market-surveillance.ul.com/
I'm guessing that Shimano Steps and some other brands have been tested to the UL 2849 or UL 2271 Standard, by some other laboratory, not tested and certified by Underwriters Laboratories. For example ACTLAb (https://act-lab.com/ul-2849/) claims to be a ISO/IEC 17025 Accredited Independent Testing Laboratory and to test to the UL 2849 standard.
@Fire_Safety , what is the correct language for a bike brand to use if a model of theirs has been tested by a lab other than UL against a UL standard? What should we watch for to ensure compliance? For example, Enorau American states simply "all of our ebikes have passed the UL 2849 testing" while making no claim to be "UL Certified". https://eunorau-ebike.com/blogs/news/we-are-ul-2849-tested-and-ul-2271-tested
@Fire_Safety , what is the correct language for a bike brand to use if a model of theirs has been tested by a lab other than UL against a UL standard? What should we watch for to ensure compliance? For example, Enorau American states simply "all of our ebikes have passed the UL 2849 testing" while making no claim to be "UL Certified". https://eunorau-ebike.com/blogs/news/we-are-ul-2849-tested-and-ul-2271-tested
Last edited:
Fire_Safety
Member
- Region
- USA
More than half the requirements of most UL safety standards are about construction, design, engineering, and material principles, not just about testing. UL 2849 is not a testing standard, it’s a system safety standard and requires engineering evaluation to determine product compliance.
An ISO 17025 testing laboratory can not issue product safety certification nor declare a product is certified to a UL Safety Standard. ISO 17065 Certification organizations do that, they must have engineering training records to demonstrate competency as well as quality records that demonstrate impartiality. The majority of ISO 17065 certification organizations operate ISO 17025 testing laboratories. UL Solutions is an accredited ISO 17065 certification organization with ISO 17025 labs specific to UL 2849, UL 2271, and other UL/IEC/ISO/EN safety standards required in US, Canada, and around the world.
While being accredited to ISO 17065 is the minimum requirement, in US there is a program from OSHA called the National Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) program. The name of it is a bit of a misnomer, it is actually a program for certification organizations to be approved to be able to certify to recognized OSHA safety standards. UL 2849, UL 2271, and other related micromobility safety standards are on the OSHA safety standard list. Only two certification organizations have been approved to be OSHA NRTL for UL 2849 and four for UL 2271. UL Solutions has both approvals published in our scope of recognition and in the United States Federal Register.
State and Federal bills that are in development and looking at the New York City law as a model legislation have already identified the need to point to accredited NRTL with scope of recognition including UL 2849, UL 2271, and other related standards.
For any ISO 17025 testing laboratory that wants to help a manufacturer become product safety certified, UL Solutions does offer a third party test data program (TPTDP) that allows the ISO 17025 test lab to have the data accepted by UL Solutions following audits and verification of the testing capability. More on that is here and welcome any company interested to be a TPTDP to contact UL Solutions.
www.ul.com
An ISO 17025 testing laboratory can not issue product safety certification nor declare a product is certified to a UL Safety Standard. ISO 17065 Certification organizations do that, they must have engineering training records to demonstrate competency as well as quality records that demonstrate impartiality. The majority of ISO 17065 certification organizations operate ISO 17025 testing laboratories. UL Solutions is an accredited ISO 17065 certification organization with ISO 17025 labs specific to UL 2849, UL 2271, and other UL/IEC/ISO/EN safety standards required in US, Canada, and around the world.
While being accredited to ISO 17065 is the minimum requirement, in US there is a program from OSHA called the National Recognized Testing Laboratory (NRTL) program. The name of it is a bit of a misnomer, it is actually a program for certification organizations to be approved to be able to certify to recognized OSHA safety standards. UL 2849, UL 2271, and other related micromobility safety standards are on the OSHA safety standard list. Only two certification organizations have been approved to be OSHA NRTL for UL 2849 and four for UL 2271. UL Solutions has both approvals published in our scope of recognition and in the United States Federal Register.
State and Federal bills that are in development and looking at the New York City law as a model legislation have already identified the need to point to accredited NRTL with scope of recognition including UL 2849, UL 2271, and other related standards.
For any ISO 17025 testing laboratory that wants to help a manufacturer become product safety certified, UL Solutions does offer a third party test data program (TPTDP) that allows the ISO 17025 test lab to have the data accepted by UL Solutions following audits and verification of the testing capability. More on that is here and welcome any company interested to be a TPTDP to contact UL Solutions.
Data Acceptance Program (DAP)
Our Data Acceptance Program (DAP) provides a means to accept externally generated test data in support of UL Mark certification.
Last edited:
Fire_Safety
Member
- Region
- USA
If a company other than UL Solutions has legitimately product safety certified, the manufacturer can say “Certified by ___ to UL 2849” where the blank is the certification company’s name.
If a company only tested to UL 2849 it would not demonstrate compliance to the safety standard. I caution all in industry to not accept only tested to a safety standard as more than half of the safety standard would not have been addressed.
My other post discussed this:
https://electricbikereview.com/foru...-complied-to-certified-to-ul-certified.52322/
If a company only tested to UL 2849 it would not demonstrate compliance to the safety standard. I caution all in industry to not accept only tested to a safety standard as more than half of the safety standard would not have been addressed.
My other post discussed this:
https://electricbikereview.com/foru...-complied-to-certified-to-ul-certified.52322/
tomjasz
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Minnesnowta
Yours, I find, is a difficult site to negotiate. Here are some articles regarding certified eBikes I've found.
UL Certified Ebikes and Ebike Batteries: Full List - Ebike Escape
What is UL certification for ebikes? Which companies are getting certified? Learn more about why UL certification is important.
ebikeescape.com
Aventon gets more interesting to me every day seeing their certified models.
Radio Flyer's entire line of eBikes are certified! I'm tempted to grab one for the Mrs.
Art Deco
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Selinsgrove Pennsylvania
So after chasing my tail on this through the various links posted I can't find any ebike companies that have their entire line covered by any UL certificates. And Panasonic seems to be the only non Chinese company listed, and I won't buy a Chinese made bike unless someone else tests it, b/c I know what Chinese QC looks like.
I hope I am doing something wrong in my search .... Are things really that bleak?
What non Chinese ebikes are going to be legal in NYC if the recent law is enforced?
I hope I am doing something wrong in my search .... Are things really that bleak?
What non Chinese ebikes are going to be legal in NYC if the recent law is enforced?
Dewey
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Arlington, Virginia
The impact of e-bike electrical safety legislation will be muted/limited by lax import regulation controlled by Congress. The $800 import threshold, also called the de minimis value, permits cheap, unsafe, lithium batteries to pass through US Customs without inspection. Until this is addressed and changed by Congress, we will continue to have a battery fire problem. This may be an unintentional side effect of trade or industrial policy but it's hard not to feel like our safety as vulnerable road users is again being discounted by the same bought-and-paid-for politicians whose similar reasoning created the "chicken-tax" driving the migration of the US vehicle fleet from cars to heavier, taller, deadlier, trucks.
Instead I anticipate reading more articles reporting fires and subsequent crackdowns on shops catering to the market for electric mopeds that fall outside the 3-class e-bike definition that cannot be DOT motorcycle certified or insured or registered with the DMV because they don't have a VIN number. I think NYFD would be happy if people moving forward traded-in their non-UL compliant batteries and bought UL compliant bikes and batteries, it's encouraging to read the efforts being made to help riders make the transition.
Reading the opinions and policies from responsible shop owners it does appear the NBDA are on board with shifting the US e-bike market towards UL-compliance. There are already some shops with service policies that won't service an e-bike that doesn't have a UL sticker. Like you I would like brands to provide more transparency about UL-compliant models.
Instead I anticipate reading more articles reporting fires and subsequent crackdowns on shops catering to the market for electric mopeds that fall outside the 3-class e-bike definition that cannot be DOT motorcycle certified or insured or registered with the DMV because they don't have a VIN number. I think NYFD would be happy if people moving forward traded-in their non-UL compliant batteries and bought UL compliant bikes and batteries, it's encouraging to read the efforts being made to help riders make the transition.
Reading the opinions and policies from responsible shop owners it does appear the NBDA are on board with shifting the US e-bike market towards UL-compliance. There are already some shops with service policies that won't service an e-bike that doesn't have a UL sticker. Like you I would like brands to provide more transparency about UL-compliant models.
m@Robertson
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
A lot of this discussion is missing the point. NYC doesn't have an uncertified battery problem anywhere near as much as it has a grossly-unsafe-practices problem. As in: its people.
If you have a UL-certified battery and charger and you go to a charger farm, are you any safer? I can't find a pic at the moment but we all have seen the back-room wall o' chargers where dozens of batteries and dozens of chargers are hooked up to household electric systems.
If your UL-certified battery conks out (gracefully since its certified) if you go and buy a second used battery made up from a slew of others by a local repairman, is there any danger?
I've talked with someone in the ebike industry recently who lives in NYC and in his opinion these laws are going to do nothing to stop these things. It will only move them from front rooms to back rooms.
-----
EDIT: The thousands of NYC consumers who have a decent income and buy the bikes from bike shops for leisure and light transportation use ... they will be buying UL-certified stuff and thats nice. But for the many tens of thousands of delivery workers (65,000 in 2022 in NYC, although not all of those are on ebikes I am sure) barely eke'ing out a living every day on an ebike ... they will buy an ultra-low-cost bike via back channels (i.e. across the bridge in NJ, or by internet in a plain box) and they will still buy frankenstein'd replacement and supplemental batteries from the local fixit guy who does not have an official storefront. They'll also keep charging at the local battery exchange or whatever passes for that in their neighborhood.
You can certify all the products you want but if you don't address the cost issues of buying smart along with them, the real population of unsafe riders isn't going to be affected. I have been arguing for years that the battery is the very last place you should be even thinking of a price bargain, and its a complete waste of time when we're talking $200 versus $900.
If you have a UL-certified battery and charger and you go to a charger farm, are you any safer? I can't find a pic at the moment but we all have seen the back-room wall o' chargers where dozens of batteries and dozens of chargers are hooked up to household electric systems.
If your UL-certified battery conks out (gracefully since its certified) if you go and buy a second used battery made up from a slew of others by a local repairman, is there any danger?
I've talked with someone in the ebike industry recently who lives in NYC and in his opinion these laws are going to do nothing to stop these things. It will only move them from front rooms to back rooms.
-----
EDIT: The thousands of NYC consumers who have a decent income and buy the bikes from bike shops for leisure and light transportation use ... they will be buying UL-certified stuff and thats nice. But for the many tens of thousands of delivery workers (65,000 in 2022 in NYC, although not all of those are on ebikes I am sure) barely eke'ing out a living every day on an ebike ... they will buy an ultra-low-cost bike via back channels (i.e. across the bridge in NJ, or by internet in a plain box) and they will still buy frankenstein'd replacement and supplemental batteries from the local fixit guy who does not have an official storefront. They'll also keep charging at the local battery exchange or whatever passes for that in their neighborhood.
You can certify all the products you want but if you don't address the cost issues of buying smart along with them, the real population of unsafe riders isn't going to be affected. I have been arguing for years that the battery is the very last place you should be even thinking of a price bargain, and its a complete waste of time when we're talking $200 versus $900.
Last edited:
Dewey
Well-Known Member
- Region
- USA
- City
- Arlington, Virginia
The Ebikes sub-Reddit forum has a thread that blew up yesterday after a US bike shop owner posted a photo of a letter he received from his shop insurer, warning of an unaffordable rise in insurance premiums obliging his shop to stop working on non-UL 2849 certified e-bikes. Comments from other shop owners confirm they too have found for this year renewing their shop insurance with increases >$10,000 making them reconsider working on non-UL 2849 compliant e-bikes. Because insurance affects all shops including bicycle Co-Ops and mobile vans presumably this means fewer bike mechanics could work on non-UL certified ebikes. Also if commercial shop insurance is acting this way, presumably its only a matter of time before UL 2849 certification affects liability in personal renters/home owners insurance.
Last edited:
Similar threads
