Re: EMC compliance question

On 14-10-2024 18:55, legg wrote:

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.
 

[snip]
A list of fines if you place products on the EU marked without CE or non-compliant CE:
https://www.sicomtesting.com/en/blog/ce-marking-conformity-checks/