Hello everyone,
This will seem to many as a very basic question, but I am having a hard
time finding clear information on this:
If a non-European manufacturer wants to ship products to Europe,
exclusively to another manufacturer/integrator, who will then put the
products onto the market,
Martin,
A couple of things come to mind about this they are :
If the product is classified as a component / sub-assembly and not to be used
by the end user there is no need for a CE mark under the EMC Directive.
If a finished appliance is intended exclusively for an industrial assembly
Hi Martin,
only the integrator puts the complete product onto the market, after
integrating them in a complete system that is CE marked. With regard to
CE-marked before first entering Europe you have to distinguish between
products and components. If the integrator integrates a product (that can
In message 4f73067b.4040...@matrox.com, dated Wed, 28 Mar 2012, Martin
E. Cormier mcorm...@matrox.com writes:
If a non-European manufacturer wants to ship products to Europe,
exclusively to another manufacturer/integrator, who will then put the
products onto the market, after integrating them
Thanks to everyone for their inputs, and they confirm the feeling I
had. It just seems scary to me to try and pass customs with a pallet of
PC Add-in boards that don't bear the CE logo.
The products are not in a seperate housing, but could be compared to
graphics adapters. They will not be
I am looking at an x-cap that is marked with 'CE'. I am looking at a relay
that is marked 'CE'. I am looking at my mu-metal brain shield - no CE mark.
Note that my Bugs Bunny tie, that was purchased in Europe, did not bear the
CE mark on packaging or the end item.
The people in the European part
In message b7adc8fc5285487980d1706d9f805...@tamuracorp.com, dated Wed,
28 Mar 2012, Brian Oconnell oconne...@tamuracorp.com writes:
I am looking at an x-cap that is marked with 'CE'.
Wrong.
I am looking at a relay that is marked 'CE'.
If it's a 'simple' relay (how would one know?)
A PC add-in board is just one of the examples that need ce-mark. I hope you
were just kiddin
Gert Gremmen
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: emc-p...@ieee.org [mailto:emc-p...@ieee.org] Namens Martin E. Cormier
Verzonden: woensdag 28 maart 2012 16:50
Aan: emc-p...@ieee.org
Onderwerp: Re:
Oh! This is getting interesting...
It was the exact pupose of my original question. We know that our
regular products, i.e. the ones that may be put directly into market,
have to be CE marked. But in this case, we would ship our add-in boards
as components, only to a
Here is relevant guidance from the revised Commission guide to the EMC
directive. plug-in boards are an example, but only those that are for
incorporation into an apparatus by the end-user
1.2.3.1 Components/sub-assemblies within scope
Components or sub-assemblies on the market which are:
- for
Martin
Your product as described is excluded from EMC directive.
Look at the Guidance, available from
http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/sectors/electrical/documents/emc/guidance/index_en.htm
1.2.3.1 Components/sub-assemblies within scope
Components or sub-assemblies on the market which are:
To all,
The key rests with the requirements of the EMC Directive and in its guidance
document in that if this device could be considered as a finished assembly
(apparatus) or not and if it is intended to be put on the market or placed into
service (made available to the end user) or not.
As
John,
It seems possible the x-cap and relay manufacturer could be CE marking
for the RoHS-2 Directive particularly if the items are offered for sale
to anyone out of a catalog. The Commission has yet to issue guidance
as to whether B2B component sales require CE marking for RoHS-2.
Why is a
Martin et al,
You ask a very good question here...
There has always been confusion on this subject.
Unfortunately, the folks who developed the CE marking scheme didn't
have enough experience with how equipment is built up from component pieces
sources all over the
Right, but you have to be very sure
in what to write down on your customs
papers, to make sure they won't get
blocked. Citing 1.2.3.2 is clearly not enough.
Especially not if your device looks and feels like 1.3.2.1
Gert Gremmen
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: emc-p...@ieee.org
In message
e79b96282e4f9f43baf7c6d3d578acde0801e...@ca1exclv07.adcorp.kla-tencor.co
m, dated Wed, 28 Mar 2012, Crane, Lauren
lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com writes:
It seems possible the x-cap and relay manufacturer could be CE marking
for the RoHS-2 Directive particularly if the items are
In message 4f73476e.20...@matrox.com, dated Wed, 28 Mar 2012, Martin
E. Cormier mcorm...@matrox.com writes:
My understanding, up to now, was that in that case, the final
manufacturer is responsible of declaring its product compliant. He
would be putting the CE marking on the complete
I've experienced this (customs reacting to what an import looks like
rather than what it is) a few times over my career. I'm beginning to
wonder in this climate where so many details matter that may be beyond
the reasonable knowledge of a customs inspector, if something like a
declaration of
My employer can provide a 'Certificate of Conformity', which can have a
reference to a DoC and can state intended use; for some products it is
displayed on the box. I have seen other companies do this for whatever
customer requirement reasons.
I propose an IECEE form for the Proclamation of the
In message
e79b96282e4f9f43baf7c6d3d578acde0801e...@ca1exclv07.adcorp.kla-tencor.co
m, dated Wed, 28 Mar 2012, Crane, Lauren
lauren.cr...@kla-tencor.com writes:
if something like a declaration of purpose should be included with
every shipment that would not otherwise have a declaration of
I propose an IECEE form for the Proclamation of the Declaration of a
Certification of Conformity.
Why propose new documents when good old circular reasoning can solve the
problem. Especially if the real problem is not necessarily complying with the
directive but getting it past the customs
The siege is underway. The senior design engineers claim that, after
conference with colleagues in other companies, many of my conformity
requirements have never been required by their compliance people.
Some of the receiving/approval processes that are in dispute:
- CoC from plastic component
Hi Brian:
- CoC from plastic component supplier that is not recognized molder.
I simply did not accept a non-recognized molder. If we
want to use a non-recognized molder, I accept parts
provided that the molder can provide documents showing
he is in process of becoming a recognized molder.
Hi Brian,
Sounds like a fun time. :(
Can't comment on any except: - EMC re-test for some changes of PCB layout.
That is definitely a possibility but the change has to significantly change
some EMC parameter - clock speed, edges, extra high-speed surface tracks,
outside interface circuits,
24 matches
Mail list logo
