Hi Tony In my experience, if you are embedding wireless modules that already have CE authorisation from the original manufacturer, then a Technical File and Notified Body Opinion is cheaper. I have done this for a number of clients. If you need more details contact me directly. Regards David Shidlowsky Technical Writer EMC Laboratory ITL (Product Testing) Ltd. Lod/Kfar Bin Nun Israel Tel: +972-8-918-6113 Fax: +972-8-915-3101 Email: [email protected]/[email protected] http://www.itl.co.il <http://www.itl.co.il/> This e-mail message may contain privileged or confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you may not disclose, use, disseminate, distribute, copy or rely upon this message or attachment in any way. If you received this e-mail message in error, please return by forwarding the message and its attachments to the sender.
________________________________ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, May 03, 2011 5:03 PM To: [email protected] Subject: R&TTE Notified Body Opinion Cheaper than Full Testing? Hi, I design bespoke vehicle/personnel tracking and machine-machine communications systems for clients using GPS and GSM/cellular technologies, sometimes RF wireless (e.g. 433 & 2400 MHz unlicensed), mostly embedding GPS/GSM/wireless modules within custom electronics. These are normally manufactured in a few 10’s at most. We self-declare to the R&TTE Directive by testing to the relevant harmonised standards – this is phenomenally expensive for the volumes we produce. Alternatively, I suspect it would be considerably (very considerably) cheaper to supply a Technical File, including very limited testing results, design data and technical rationales to a R&TTE Notified Body to confirm compliance with the R&TTED. We naturally produce most of this information anyway as part of the development. The NB certificate would satisfy us, regulatory authorities and clients. Does anybody have experience of using this alternative approach – is it a viable and cheaper alternative. Feel free to reply off-line if you wish. Thanks in advance for your views, Tony - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <[email protected]> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <[email protected]> David Heald <[email protected]> - ---------------------------------------------------------------- This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at http://product-compliance.oc.ieee.org/ Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <[email protected]> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher <[email protected]> David Heald <[email protected]>
