Sujet : Re: EMC compliance question
De : bill.sloman (at) *nospam* ieee.org (Bill Sloman)
Groupes : sci.electronics.designDate : 13. Oct 2024, 17:03:48
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vegr16$nscc$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
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.
-- Bill Sloman, Sydney
EMC compliance question
Re: EMC compliance question