Page 1 of 3

U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission

Directorate for Engineering Sciences (ES)

Telephone Log

SUBJECT: Bassinet Mattress Angle Test Method Task Group Meeting

DATE OF MEETING: 28 June 2010

LOG ENTRY SOURCE: Han Lim, ES

LOCATION: Via Teleconference

CPSC ATTENDEE(S): Han Lim, ES

NON-CPSC ATTENDEE(S):

Tony Fernandes (Dorel / Task Group Leader for Bassinet Testing Work Group); Russ 

Butson (Kolcraft); Kandi Mell (Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association, JPMA); 

Steve Anzaroot (Delta); Lauren Pfeiffer (JPMA); Bob Coughlin (Kids II); Mark Mendes 

(Kids II); Mike Dwyer (JPMA)

BACKGROUND:

Mr. Fernandes and other group members expressed concern about potential test-to-test 

variability when using a CAMI dummy for evaluating bassinet/play yard mattress flatness as the 

method is proposed in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. Based on a suggestion1from Kids II 

representatives, Mr. Coughlin and Mr. Mendes, CPSC staff (Engineering Sciences, Health 

Sciences, and Human Factors) developed a triangle test probe and associated test procedures 

which have the potential to evaluate possible suffocation scenarios caused by V-shaped 

sections formed from two mattress panels of a bassinet/play yard mattress. Subsequently, 

testing to verify the procedure was performed by CPSC staff on seven bassinet/play yard units. 

SUMMARY OF MEETING:

Mr. Fernandes, Task Group Leader for the Bassinet Mattress Angle Test Method called to order 

this meeting at 11:00 AM Eastern Time. Introductions were made. 

DISCUSSION:

Triangular Probe Test Method

In this test method, a 17 lb cylinder, which has the same weight as a CAMI Mark II Dummy, is 

placed between two end panels of a bassinet/play yard mattress. A 10 lb compression force is 

applied to the cylinder, and then the resulting V-shaped space is evaluated for suffocation 

hazards. While the cylinder is still resting on the mattress under test, the triangle probe is

placed 1 inch from the cylinder. If two sides of the triangle touch the two mattress panels, it 

 

1

See Telephone Log, 7 April 2010, Evaluating Bassinet/Play Yard Mattress Flatness.
Page 2 of 3

would be considered a failure. This result would indicate that air flow is restricted if a baby’s 

face is between two mattress panels. See Figure 2. 

Figure 1 Figure 2

Mr. Lim explained that this test method may simplify the test procedure and could possibly 

reduce lab-to-lab variability. The rationale Mr. Lim used was that a cylinder will produce the 

same footprint on a given mattress, thus the results will be consistent and repeatable. The use 

of a probe eliminates the need for measuring the actual angle formed when the mattress is 

compressed and instead requires a quick visual inspection to determine a pass or fail result. 

The dimensions of the triangular probe were refined by CPSC Human Factors and Health 

Sciences staff: the dimensions represent the mandible width and nose depth of 0 to 5 month 

olds (Source: Farkas, L. G., Anthropometry of the Head and Face, Raven Press Ltd., 1994).

Mr. Butson commented that the CAMI dummy surrogate (cylinder) does not have to be made of 

aluminum, considering that it could be costly. Mr. Lim expressed agreement and suggested that

the surrogate could be a rigid cylinder with a smooth finish and the following dimensions: 6.3 

inch diameter and 11.02 inch height. In addition to the cylinder, Mr. Butson suggested using two 

plates on a hinge for the cylinder to rest on. 

Mr. Fernandes expressed a concern that, on some bassinet play yard models, the outer shell 

fabric or liner can become wrinkled once the 17 lb cylinder is placed. If one side of the triangle 

touches a wrinkle, it is possible this may indicate a false positive. The members discussed

some options such as applying a force (to be determined) on the triangle to avoid the false 

positive readings or making the probe heavier, perhaps made of brass or similar material to 

inherently apply a force of its own weight. 

Rock/Swing Angle

Mr. Fernandes discussed Delta’s comment regarding the possible use of the Australian test 

method for measuring the rest angle with no mattress and no dead weight. While this method 

arguably may be consistent, Mr. Lim commented that an empty bassinet will not be 

representative nor would it mimic a child in the bassinet/cradle.

Mr. Lim discussed data that supported the use of a single test method to measure 

rocking/swinging angles. The wood block cannot be placed in all products and did not appear to 

be as consistent as the aluminum angle for mounting the inclinometer. The data suggests that 

the cylinder aluminum angle combination produced the most consistent, repeatable set of 

results.
Page 3 of 3

Mr. Butson raised the concern about the order of steps in the procedure. He suggested that the 

aluminum angle be mounted prior to the swinging motion. Mr. Lim disagreed because the angle 

could slide off the test bassinet. The group determined that it would be beneficial if the 

aluminum angle was clamped instead of placed on top of the frame. The group also discussed

how this clamp would look and suggested some possible adaptations to the aluminum angle. 

Static Loading

Based on an in-depth investigation (IDI) report, Mr. Lim raised concerns that products that 

contain swinging bassinets inside play yards can detach partially, causing possible suffocation 

scenarios if an infant becomes entrapped in a gap or opening. Mr. Lim suggested looking into 

multiple static load tests on multiple locations, such as corners, to adequately challenge the 

product to scenarios where the infant may not be located in the center of the product all the 

time. The task group suggested testing a single, most onerous location. Mr. Lim expressed 

agreement with this suggestion..

Flat Surrogate

Mr. Butson briefly mentioned the possibility of a flat surrogate. Mr. Lim expressed his concerns 

with the method. Mr. Lim believed that a flat surrogate will flatten a given mattress surface, 

especially a segmented play yard mattress, which would present the best case scenario and not 

the most stringent scenario.

Fabric Sided Testing

Mr. Butson expressed his concern with the fabric side testing procedure in the NPR. He 

believed it may require multiple testing scenarios such as testing with and without canopy, etc. 

Mr. Fernandes and Mr. Anzaroot discussed options that would limit the testing to address the 

entrapment hazard associated with separating fabric and exposure to rails/rigid members, which 

is the main concern. Mr. Fernandes suggested changing the section 7.10.6 to include testing 

that requires the test lab to test in all use positions that affect fabric configurations. 

Miscellaneous Testing Discussions

There were brief discussions regarding minimum side heights and positioning of the CAMI for 

the stability tests. Mr. Fernandes discussed the history and evolution of the F 2194 standard 

and explained that these issues were discussed and insufficient rationale was put forth to 

include these issues into the voluntary F 2194 standard.

Extension of Comment Period

Mr. Dwyer inquired about options regarding an extension of time for the NPR comment period. 

Mr. Lim said he would check with the Office of General Counsel and follow up. Mr. Lim 

suggested that a written request to the Office of Secretary would be the first step in the approval 

process to extend the comment period. Mr. Lim reminded the group that the comment period 

will end on July 12, 2010.

The meeting was adjourned at 12:35 PM Eastern Time.