Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: legg <legg@nospam.magma.ca>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: EMC compliance question
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 12:55:25 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <jmhqgj17oib3gqav9328fb205s4v76sgev@4ax.com>
References: <67070ba9$1$1783$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com> <ve9e5c$39rmc$1@dont-email.me> <dsfggj1a5m9mise9781qmh1roqv3pb68jr@4ax.com> <vebshs$3p3c0$1@dont-email.me> <m9uigjh5mh3rbiqkkpr660vnmtanf5a15f@4ax.com> <KSrOO.413184$hKDf.331455@fx07.ams4> <f3bmgjpc9o50rg8vji74imaccb9jst086r@4ax.com> <vegr16$nscc$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 18:53:20 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="eea47497ddeee9e9ea2698e96e18cb72";
	logging-data="1358549"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19BF0eMb/O/yU2oGVTi6NaJ"
Cancel-Lock: sha1:fPBXK2hjOj1RtfW1clz3q0dTw6w=
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
Bytes: 3694

On Mon, 14 Oct 2024 03:03:48 +1100, Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org>
wrote:

>On 13/10/2024 1:21 pm, legg wrote:
>> On Sat, 12 Oct 2024 21:06:32 +1100, Chris Jones
>> <lugnut808@spam.yahoo.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 12/10/2024 6:20 am, john larkin wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 20:59:09 +0200, Klaus Vestergaard Kragelund
>>>> <klauskvik@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 10-10-2024 23:11, john larkin wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 13:41:07 -0700, Don Y
>>>>>> <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/9/2024 4:03 PM, bitrex wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> Standards have become an established method of protecting local
>> industry from lower cost imported goods from less socially
>> responsible sources.
>
>Since they are published internationally, they don't protect the local 
>industry all that well. When I was working in England we paid attention 
>to the American Underwriter's Laboratory standards so we could sell our 
>stuff in the US.
>
>> It's one way of encouraging social responsibility and raising
>> technical awareness abroad, if you are an important market for
>> the products of secondary industry.
>> 
>> They try to do this with tertiary industries (financial and
>> service), but the weasels generally tap dance faster than
>> the regulators, have more money and less conscience.
>> 
>> Hence CE.
>
>Americans are cynical about CE. When I was designing stuff in Europe we 
>did take it seriously - just as seriously as UL.

If you have a European (or any international) market, you have to 
take the IEC regulations seriously - even UL's and CSA's later 
standards were/are coordinated with them . . . .with national 
exceptions.

Their origins are found in the old GDR VDE standards that spawned them
and the regular revisions to current IEC regs keep foreign designers 
hopping.

The actual standards that CE implies are widespread, including 
such features as organizational (quality and recording), 
environmental (process and material) - not just safety and EMC.

These are all apparently self-declared - compliance lists and proof 
 being available 'on request'.for inspection. Any product that 
threatens markets seriously will be challenged - but a serious 
amount of capital is transgerred just through the distribution 
of consumer trash.

Asian standards similarly mimic the IEC coat hangers, but their 
purpose can be almost decorative, until they are not.

RL