Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Klaus Vestergaard Kragelund <klauskvik@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design
Subject: Re: EMC compliance question
Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2024 21:47:02 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <ve9avm$39grv$1@dont-email.me>
References: <67070ba9$1$1783$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
 <ko3egjh48259s212n8i8dc6jql0vlc9vb8@4ax.com>
 <67072de6$1$3068692$882e4bbb@reader.netnews.com>
 <7ceegjl7tbqvpgi98hngug9dbr01tdvfqp@4ax.com> <ve8h31$35b1u$1@dont-email.me>
 <4krfgj9ofiu0vrgjlsqdbos01h148ff7ik@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2024 21:47:02 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="400ad34bdcf2d7214ff936efefc84a64";
	logging-data="3457919"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+dE6ad5wisITd6lRrWo9AyPRNWodZEyZs="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:DHnAj+ZYrzjsugMjoIfJJCHwZ9I=
In-Reply-To: <4krfgj9ofiu0vrgjlsqdbos01h148ff7ik@4ax.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2639

On 10-10-2024 17:58, john larkin wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 13:25:04 +0100, Clive Arthur
> <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>> On 10/10/2024 03:21, john larkin wrote:
>>
>> <snip CE chat>
>>>
>>> Do you really care?
>>>
>>> My Brit friends say that CE means Can't Enforce.
>>
>> Or Chinese Export.
>>
>> They may say that, but I bet they comply - it means if your competitor
>> finds out that you don't comply you have problems.  I've never worked
>> anywhere where it's not taken seriously.
> 
> In europe, "taking seriously" often means buying a reel of CE stickers
> and slapping them on everything.
> 
> Did you EMI lab test everything that you sold?
> 

I have never seen any developers in Europe sell products that are not 
tested and compliant.

I have seen many Chinese products that fails testing, but also seen 
Chinese products that comply with very ingenious solutions.


> We mostly sell things that go onto bigger systems, and our customer
> worries about certifications. So we only need to not make them fail.
> Our box could be buried deep inside their system.
> 

Right, that's the differentiation. You do not need to test products that 
go into a system, just as long as the complete unit complies.

But, if it fails, it can be hard to find out which one of the sub 
assemblies are the root cause, and time is money