"CE" mark self certification

[GaryAviation]

Hi, I have a problem and I am getting no assistance from the EU, their Market Surveillance folks - nobody. Hopefully one of you folks can assist me.

My company manufactures test equipment that is directed by the Boeing Aircraft Company in their aircraft manuals to be used on the aircraft to test/verify components of the jet engine. The LVD annex II says that "Specialized Electronic Equipment" used on the aircraft is exempted from the LVD standard and therefore would not need the "CE" mark. However, we have a customer that is making noise about our equipment requiring the "CE" approval. He says that equipment being used "ON" the aircraft means that it flies with the aircraft. Our equipment is used on the ground, on the aircraft to test and verify.

If we decide to self certify our equipment (which I beleive it will pass) what standard(s) should we use? Is there a general standard that is easy to pass? Or is there some special standard we must use because we sell test equipment used on aircraft? Anyone have any ideas??

[Melanie]

Lets just stick to CE marking and not muddy the waters about any form of flight certification which has NOTHING to do with CE marking.

If your product meets ANY Directive, you are entitled to stick a CE mark on it and certify saying so. So pick one that you just can't fail on. Let's forget the fact that your product radiates spurious emissions further than Chernobyl, if it passes something like...

Machinery Directive 94/44/EEC
or The Low Voltage Directive 93/68/EEC
or The Low Voltage Equipment Regulations (Safety) 1989
or EN 50082-1
or EN 50082-2
or many others...

then you're entitled to write a little dinky self certification certificate and nail a CE mark on your product.

CE is regulated in the UK by Trading Standards... who have more work on their plate trying to protect the General Public from unhealthy eateries than they can cope with... like you're EVER going to get a Trading Standards Officer knocking on your door armed with anthing other than a spot thermometer and saying that for public helath reasons your product should be stored in the fridge at below 4C.

Just to look intelligent in case a TS Officer ever came calling, I've a copy of "EMC for Product Designers - Meeting the European Directive" ISBN 0750649305 sitting on my shelf. It's only for show... I've never bothered to look inside.

[keithdoxey]

if it passes something like...

Machinery Directive 94/44/EEC
or The Low Voltage Directive 93/68/EEC
or The Low Voltage Equipment Regulations (Safety) 1989
or EN 50082-1
or EN 50082-2
or many others...

then you're entitled to write a little dinky self certification certificate and nail a CE mark on your product.

Hi Melanie,

Do you have any links to sites that explain those directives in plain english that a normal person can understand without a degree in legalease.

I tried to find simple explanations but couldnt find any and as far as I could see you need to spend serious money to get an official copy of any directive which would then take you the rest of your life to read (based on the fact that you would lose the will to live!)

I did buy a book that was recommended to me but still cant figure out what you *should* do

[Luciano]

Hi, I have a problem and I am getting no assistance from the EU, their Market
Surveillance folks - nobody.

Hi,

Not surprising.
Same as "I don't get help from the legislator and the court judge for my case of drunk driving".
Two options, hire a lawyer or defend yourself without a lawyer.

See these links:
http://www.ce-mag.com/suppliers/cat/341.html

Best regards,

Luciano

[oldtoddler]

.. He says that equipment being used "ON" the aircraft means that it flies with the aircraft. Our equipment is used on the ground, on the aircraft to test and verify.

If we decide to self certify our equipment (which I beleive it will pass) what standard(s) should we use? Is there a general standard that is easy to pass? Or is there some special standard we must use because we sell test equipment used on aircraft? Anyone have any ideas??

Well,well... Generally any equipment used in aircraft manufacturing process (and testing) needs to be certified..

If u're about 95%, or say at least 80%, sure that nobody wont get killed after that equipment of yours been used to test that crashed aircraft, I'd say it's pretty safe to put that self certified CE-sticker in it and never bother your head with the matter again.. I know that this is the way things have been done for last 10 or 15 yearsin in some "southern countries of Europe" - they do write those CoC's without any quilt.. then again - if u need to play safe, then it just might be a good idea to do some homework.. one rule: list all standards your equipment meets, and if you are not 100% sure - don't list it..

Personally u're pretty safe as long as you don't put your signature into any piece of paper (CoC).. That does not acquit your boss and the company u work in.. If you have already signed even one CoC, then your ass is mine.. be sure that once your ass is on the line-some sunny day someone will burn _your_ ass... o:-)

And if u ever quote me, I'll straightforwardly deny everything... o:-)

[GaryAviation]

Folks: Thanks to all who replied to my question(s) on CE certification. I took your advice and ordered EN 50082-1 and EN 50082-2. PROBLEM ?? I did not receive either. I received the following:

BS EN 61000-6-1:2001 and BS EN 61000-6-2:2005

Are these two officially replacing the EN 50082-1 and EN 50082-2? And on my self certification document, I can simply list one of these and call it a day?

Thanks

[hansknec]

If your product meets ANY Directive, you are entitled to stick a CE mark on it and certify saying so.

Melanie, You are actually in the UK right? I say that because those of us across the pond (USA) have been given a much more restrictive warning about CE marks. I sold a product to Darsbury University and needed the CE mark. I "self" certified as is allowed and saved the $8000 EMC and Low Voltage directive testing, but I really felt like I was pushing my luck. Everything I read about CE indicated that I needed to check off ALL directives that the product fell under and then show that the product met ALL directives before affixing the mark. (sidebar- can you believe there are companies selling the gif image for CE? As if we can't find the image elsewhere and photoshop it.)

I think the fear is not that some postal inspector will catch you, but rather the fact that one of your EU competitors might rat on you to the authorities in order to get your product banned.

I would love to have you dissuade my fears, because I just got a quote from a testing company for a new product. $12500 to certify it for EMC and Low voltage directives.

[hansknec]

To answer your original question -- Yes.

EN61000:2001 is the new EMC standard.
I think the sub chapters followed the old 50082 numbers.

A good web search will yield all the right numbers for you.

John

[lester]

Speaking as somebody that has been through not only the certification process for products that we manufacture and market, but also as someone who has been through the mill when prosecuted for non compliance under the EMC directive, I think i'm fairly well positioned in saying that:

Many people attach the CE mark without testing correctly or even understanding exactly what directives apply. They "get way with it" because they are not challenged.

You do need to test and you do need to understand which directives apply. You are accountable ( not the company, but the signatory on the compliance statement).

If you are supplying to a gov't agency or any client likely to carry out due dilligence, i.e any one that specifically asks for CE, be sure to ensure that you have thourougly researched the relevent directives.

(The same applies to RoHS)

I dont have it to hand, but if you PM me i'll point you to two excellent books that will spell it out for you. And if you like to call me, i'll explain what happenms when OfCom get wind of a non compliant product, via the local trading standards officer or by Govt agency.

Rememebr that in the UK failure to comply is a criminal office, with a penalty that can include not only a fine but also imprisonment.

A two year battle resulted in my name being cleared, the company receiving a fine and 15000 GBP in costs.

And that was related to failure to comply with the legislation on a product that was exempt form CE, under Functionality, use and End User.

There is also a case in the UK where a company building home PC's for retail sale, used all CE marked parts, but failed to test the fully built product. They assumed that by using CE marked parts they could CE mark the final product, without further testing. WRONG, resulted in 3 MONTHS prison sentence for the company director and a big fine.


My advice, dont take advise from non qualified peers, anecdotal evidence is no defence. If it all goes pear shaped, the court will not accept "so and so on the forum said it would be OK"

BUT, you are in the USA, yes? So the importer is the responsible party, and thats your client
------------------------------o0o---------------------------------
I just deleted a whole load of advsie that i'm pretty sure is correct, but i'm not qualified to give. (legal stuff, that i learned during our prosecution)

PM me or call me if you wish.


BTW, I learned so much during our prosecution, that ending up with a clear name and paying 15000 GBP, was actually well worth the money (when viewed in commercial terms), made loads of really good contacts, including those on the presecution team, who i'm still in touch with. Even went for a drink with one of them after the case.

[lester]

Actually i just read this thread again,

If you were in the UK you're flying really close to the wind.

Just the content of this thread, in the hands of prosecution, are enough to counter any mitigation that you might plead if you failed to comply.

its scary.

[Joe S.]

Even went for a drink with one of them after the case.

Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer!
Regards Lester,
JS

[lester]

Yep it pays

[hansknec]

I am confused about one thing though, and I ask it on the forum so that others may find clarity in your answer. Are you saying that when some professor at a university asks a little grey-haired lady in purchasing to buy a thingamabob from this guy across the pond, then she is the importer and is therefore the responsible party?

I'm not selling the particular device anymore to EU, but I did do quite a bit of research and the technical construction file ... blah moot point now.

I am planning on selling something else in the future. I'll just make sure I make a boat load of money over here first then pay for a qualified independent lab analysis for CE, or find a partner over the pond to import and distribute after doing their own analysis.

[hansknec]

Can somebody over there slap Melanie in the hand for her earlier "advice"? The poor guy is probably sitting in prison now.

[Luciano]

The poor guy is probably sitting in prison now...

And nobody knows why he doesn't want to join
the correctional education (CE) program.....

[lester]

What Melanie said was in some parts correct. The CE mark refers only to the stated use when the product is put onto the market. So you test to meet the stated use.

My point is that it's not straight forward, you cannot simply interpret the legislation such that it suits you. So you can't test for one thing that's an easy pass, CE mark your product and then put it on to the market knowing full well that it will be used in a completely different way. (well you can, but that's neglecting your responsibility)

You cannot stop the consumer using the product outside of the stated purpose, but you do have a responsibility to ensure that you meet the EMC directives relevant to probable use.

Its not that difficult to identify the correct EMC directives and to understand exactly what OTHER areas you need to test and state compliance in. Read the legislation or get advise.

DONT rely on people like me or Melanie, (i'm not qualified to give definitive answers).

Like it or not, if you import into or manufacture and put a product onto the market in the EU you have a responsibility and if challenged you need to show that you have conformed to the relative legislation. Don't rely on the challenger being more ignorant than you, it might not be the case.

Actually its pretty much the same situation as when you're developing your product, you read the data sheets don't you?

Oh, and YES if the prof gets the little lady in purchasing to import a product it needs to meet the legislation and the importer is responsible...BUT educational use is different, there are massive exemptions there, so maybe CE and EMC testing is not required... READ THE LEGISLATION, ITS NOT DIFFICULT.

[lester]

Lets just stick to CE marking and not muddy the waters about any form of flight certification which has NOTHING to do with CE marking.

If your product meets ANY Directive, you are entitled to stick a CE mark on it and certify saying so. So pick one that you just can't fail on. Let's forget the fact that your product radiates spurious emissions further than Chernobyl, if it passes something like...

Machinery Directive 94/44/EEC
or The Low Voltage Directive 93/68/EEC
or The Low Voltage Equipment Regulations (Safety) 1989
or EN 50082-1
or EN 50082-2
or many others...

then you're entitled to write a little dinky self certification certificate and nail a CE mark on your product.

CE is regulated in the UK by Trading Standards... who have more work on their plate trying to protect the General Public from unhealthy eateries than they can cope with... like you're EVER going to get a Trading Standards Officer knocking on your door armed with anthing other than a spot thermometer and saying that for public helath reasons your product should be stored in the fridge at below 4C.

Just to look intelligent in case a TS Officer ever came calling, I've a copy of "EMC for Product Designers - Meeting the European Directive" ISBN 0750649305 sitting on my shelf. It's only for show... I've never bothered to look inside.

NO, Here Malanie is bending the rules.

Yes "If your product meets ANY Directive, you are entitled to stick a CE mark on it and certify saying so"

BUT you are required to test to standards that are relevant to the use of the product, so you can't do as Melanie suggested AND stay legal.

[hansknec]

When Melanie said:

I've a copy of "EMC for Product Designers - Meeting the European Directive" ISBN 0750649305 sitting on my shelf.

This in itself wouldn't "officially" be enough. How can you say something meets the standard if you don't have an actual copy of the standard?

Even Lester says "just read the legislation, it's not difficult".

Here is the problem with the whole system. They "SELL" the standards. They aren't free to download for review. It really makes it hard on the small entrepreneur to get a product into Europe. Some of them aren't cheap either. I'm in the laser safety business and IEC 60825 alone has 15 parts which cost ~$65 each. On top of that I need the machinery directive, the low voltage directive, the EMC directive, and most likely something else I've never thought of.

I guess paying for a testing house to tell you that your product meets the standards is worth the $6k to $12k.

In the end, I think Europe loses out on some innovative products because people are afraid to introduce something new. At the very least, movement of products into Europe is delayed because of the added bureaucracy.

They say it will take something like 20 years to get back to where we can put a man on the moon. It's hard to believe we once did it in 8. It all boils down to bureauracy.

John

[lester]

John I ahve to agree with your sentiments. Right now the bureaucracy in the EC is at a crzy level and does not look like its going to ease.

Yes its sensible to have harmonisation of standards, but when it's implimented as it is right now, it is simply restrictive.

Maybe thats why we have so many poeple working in software and so few in hardware and firmware.

AND, with so much legislation that is both costly and difficult to identify, its easy to see why we end up with "the blind leading the blind" which ultimately defeats the very purpose of the legislation.

However it works both ways, I find it really difficult to find a route to FCC Type approval that does not cost over 3 times as much as EMC testing and CE marking!

Incidentally, there is one supplier over here in the UK, that has a rather novel approach in sales incentives. They have their own EMC test facility and if you use parts supplied by them in your design, they will allow you to use their test facility for free. They have a qualified engineer on hand to assist.

[sayzer]

A note aside:

We have witnessed here that a lot of Chinese suppliers have been providing "CE" and all kinds of other documents to their customers at sampling stage.

When the customer(s) tests and approves the samples, they place the order as they have the documents provided by the supplier.

However, what the suppliers ship are not the same quality as the samples they had provided.

In order for this kind of supplier to get the approval for CE and other types of standards, they make a real good samples and submit these good samples to the testing labs. The samples pass and get the approval.

When the customer receives the shipment, the products are still good and do the job with no problem at customer's side. But if you submit a sample from this shipped lot to the labs, it will not pass.

-------------------

[keithdoxey]

Incidentally, there is one supplier over here in the UK, that has a rather novel approach in sales incentives. They have their own EMC test facility and if you use parts supplied by them in your design, they will allow you to use their test facility for free. They have a qualified engineer on hand to assist.

Lester, could you expand on this please

Thanks

[GaryAviation]

Hi, this is GaryAviation. Thanks to all of you who have provided a post since last Spring. Please allow me to provide you folks with an update on my company’s progress with “CE” certification.

We hired a professional firm here in the US to evaluate and test our product to meet the required CE standards. Based on their evaluation of our product and their recommendation of the EMC standard; we tested and certified our product to the EMC standard and our product passed. Great. We then “Self-Certified”. Great.

Then one of our customers challenged our certification (one of over a 100) by saying that we need the LVD standard. None of our other customers had a problem with what we did. To make a long story short, we went back to the professional firm we hired and asked why they did not recommend the LVD the first time around?? They answered that “Anyone in the UK can challenge your CE certification. They can also demand that you test to any standard that they think is relevant.”

Folks, please excuse me, but this is a big pile of crap! In a nutshell (and I use that term for several reasons – this whole thing is NUTS), it seems to me that, as a user of the CE self-certification, there are several issues that need addressing. Allow me to explain.

1. The intent of the CE certification seems to me to be a great idea. HOWEVER . . .

2. The application of the CE certification is best described as follows: “An idea someone thought up and then never though through.”

3. I have done a lot of research on this subject since my first post last Spring. To date, I have not found two people that agree on any relevant information or guidance concerning this CE certification program. Everyone has their own idea of what to do when and how. One person says certify my equipment to “Choking hazard for small children” and another person says certify to “LVD”.

4. The main problem here is that nobody in the CE certification body, OFCOM or the League of Extraordinary Gentlemen (whatever they want to call themselves) has taken the time to think out the certification process. What needs to be tested to what standard is harder to figure out than the 9,955th digit in the answer of Pi. Sorry, Lester – with all due respect – I have read the legislation and (true it is easy reading) but it is also full of ambiguity. There is no clear guidance that the average man or woman could make a decision on.

5. I totally agree with the post from “Hansknec” who basically stated that you could spend thousands of $$ of standards and 10 of thousands of $$ of testing and not even be sure that you have tested to the right standard.

6. To sum it up – CE certification is a GREAT program in theory. In practice – Good Luck! ! ! ! !

Once again – seriously, thanks to everyone who has provided their insight on this project of mine.

[hansknec]

To GaryAviation,

So one of over one hundred customers is challenging your certification? Does this halt your sales or can you simply tell this one customer to take a hike? Losing <1% of your customers doesn't seem too bad, or is this process of filing a complaint more formal?

A more generic question perhaps someone can answer: I have interpreted the Low Voltage Directive in such a way that it is my understanding that a device powered by an external 24VDC Wall Wart power supply would NOT fall under the directive. The device does not accept or provide any voltages higher than 24VDC. The Wall Wart is CE certified and of course would plug into the mains.

Thanks,

John

[mytekcontrols]

About 10 years ago I worked for a company that had units sold into Germany. About 4 years after they were sold RWTUV tagged the units as not meeting CE, and made the company shut them down until my company had fixed the problem. Interesting thing to note, is that we were being accused of not meeting certain parts of the Low Voltage Directive, even though we had previously been given a clean bill of health by TUV Rhienland based here in the US.

In order to try and make things right, we invited RWTUV from Germany, and TUV Rhienland to meet with us. This turned out to be nothing more than a big waste of time and money. Neither TUV agency could come to an agreement, and it actually turned into a very heated argument, with both parties dropping in and out of German as they spoke (very unprofessional, considering that we had no idea of what they were saying). Of course we were footing the bill to get RWTUV over here in the first place.

After many more meetings, and some very expensive proof-of-concept tests, we were finally able to establish what was minimally required to satisfy RWTUV (they had problems with contactor sizing, safety loop wiring, and indicator light colors). Funny thing is, they even re-interpreted the LV Directive's indicator light clause pertaining to one light we were using to indicate that a high pressure fault had occurred. In the directive it states that an AMBER colored light should be used to indicate a fault or cautionary condition has occurred, one that requires no user intervention (automatic shutdown). In our case this is exactly how were implementing it, since the light would only appear following the system shutdown for high pressure. Well guess what? RWTUV insisted that the indicator light needed to be RED. They would not budge on this, and we were ultimately forced to change the LED we were using on our system control board to RED. Just another case of a standard that really isn't.

To sum it all up; we had to submit to whatever changes RWTUV wanted in order to be allowed to continue selling units into Germany, and to prevent all existing systems from getting shutdown for non-compliance to CE. So even when you think you have done everything right, used a third party agency for verification, and paid out tons of money, you can still be cited for non-compliance.

As it was explained to me; the Directives are simply guidelines, and not law. What CE should have been, a declaration of having met a unified European standard, has never come to pass. There is no simple answer when it comes to European compliance, and it changes depending upon which country and/or agency you are dealing with.

[ponthirmike]

Lets just stick to CE marking and not muddy the waters about any form of flight certification which has NOTHING to do with CE marking.

If your product meets ANY Directive, you are entitled to stick a CE mark on it and certify saying so. So pick one that you just can't fail on. Let's forget the fact that your product radiates spurious emissions further than Chernobyl, if it passes something like...

Machinery Directive 94/44/EEC
or The Low Voltage Directive 93/68/EEC
or The Low Voltage Equipment Regulations (Safety) 1989
or EN 50082-1
or EN 50082-2
or many others...

then you're entitled to write a little dinky self certification certificate and nail a CE mark on your product.

CE is regulated in the UK by Trading Standards... who have more work on their plate trying to protect the General Public from unhealthy eateries than they can cope with... like you're EVER going to get a Trading Standards Officer knocking on your door armed with anthing other than a spot thermometer and saying that for public helath reasons your product should be stored in the fridge at below 4C.

Just to look intelligent in case a TS Officer ever came calling, I've a copy of "EMC for Product Designers - Meeting the European Directive" ISBN 0750649305 sitting on my shelf. It's only for show... I've never bothered to look inside.

Not actually correct. You must ensure that your product meets all the relevent new approach directives so If it comes under the EMC directive and the LVD directive it must meet both of them. You can't just stick a CE mark on a product because it meets one of the directives

[Melanie]

As has been stated already - your testing very much depends on the target market.

There are HUNDREDS of directives. They're not free - you have to BUY them (which is a personal annoyance, because if somebody makes a Law you are forced to comply with - then they should tell you and not force you to splash out $350 just to figure if it applies to you or not). Well if it doesn't, then tough, pick another one and splash out another $350. One product I designed could be classified under TWELVE different directives depending on application. That's $4000 and two days worth of reading just to figure if they apply to you! And you haven't started testing yet...

Yes, we DO test our products - we have to. I have $50K's worth of equipment sitting at my right elbow just for the purposes of compliance. But that doesn't stop me maintaining that this subject is the biggest waste of time, money and effort on the face of this planet, and that if there is any possible exemption or loophole (eg like stating that your product is for INDUSTRIAL rather than DOMESTIC usage), that you exploit it fully, because rest assured, your competitors will be doing just that.

Thank Gawd there's no directive (yet) on software... otherwise we'll all be in trouble!

So, subscribe to the Toyota principle of business:- Kanban? JIT? No, as long as nothing falls off when chewed by a three-year old - it's good to go... If I earned Akio Toyoda's salary, I wouldn't mind grovelling to congress once in a while either...