Bring a product to market without certification?

[angrybird]

I agree that western quality is going down, because they are forced to compete with chinese products being sold on an unlevel playing field to uninformed consumers.  A majority (or all?) of those western brands whose quality is going down are manufacturing in places like china.

If western quality is diminishing, it isn't because of China.  If anything, it is because investors have determined that they can get better short term gains by forcing MBA types to make decisions by proxy that should be made by the engineers doing the work.  Chinese quality has been going up for many years now and has become very good for many areas related to manufacturing/engineering/design.  Short term strategies for profit only work for so long.

I think you are spot on with the MBA statement!  Disagree on the china manufacturing quality, though.  My experience with chinese quality is that it has become more consistent, but not better.  I am excluding Taiwan from this because Taiwan is not china; Taiwan quality has been decent for some time and has definitely gotten better over time.  I have quite a bit of experience trying to teach chinese engineers and my impression is that there is no actual design that takes place in mainland china 

[ataradov]

You clearly have a china-basing agenda, that's fine.

But what radioactive is talking about not the crap you buy on eBay. But actual manufacturing equipment. And it is quite good, since they have a lot of demand for it inside the country, given that they still manufacture stuff.

[Mr. Scram]

Can we please make this thread about certifications, something practical many people have to deal with? We really don't need another thread full of protectionist fence building and patriotic flag waving, no matter the colours of that flag.

[angrybird]

I think I deflected the thread a little bit and I didn't realize I would attract a communist to it... Sorry about that 

[OwO]

If it doesn't touch mains and isn't an intentional radiator, I wouldn't worry about it. Do some basic testing with a spectrum analyzer and near field probes, get rid of high peaks if any (by e.g. enabling spread spectrum clocking), and then slap on the CE logo. FCC is easy to get around with the subassembly thing, and there are plenty of exemptions (for example test equipment is exempt).

I have quite a bit of experience trying to teach chinese engineers and my impression is that there is no actual design that takes place in mainland china 

Teach who? I work for a tiny R&D contractor and we put out designs that are disruptive in terms of performance per cost, and I'm sure there are thousands if not more similar outfits here. How else do you explain that the mainland is the biggest market for test equipment?

[angrybird]

If it doesn't touch mains and isn't an intentional radiator, I wouldn't worry about it. Do some basic testing with a spectrum analyzer and near field probes, get rid of high peaks if any (by e.g. enabling spread spectrum clocking), and then slap on the CE logo. FCC is easy to get around with the subassembly thing, and there are plenty of exemptions (for example test equipment is exempt).

I think any cable that handles a reasonable amount of power should also be closely looked at.  I've had two micro USB cables from amazon suffer red-hot fire-starting heat on the end when the power pin broke through the plastic insulating layer and touched the shield... The cables were advertised as being good for 2.4A, but were plugged into a samsung 2.0A charger and that was all it took to make them glow red.  I shut the light off in my office one night and saw this glowing thing on top of a stack of papers, it was the end of the cable.  Confusing at first, then very scary!

I am not sure what safety standard would even apply to a bare USB cable being sold?  If any?

[Cerebus]

I am excluding Taiwan from this because Taiwan is not china;

//Edit: offensive words removed. I'll just find a more amusing way to tease this little angry tit.

Be aware that the poster in question had two sock puppet accounts banned yesterday. As it happened publicly I don't think I'm out of place mentioning this out in the open. For various reasons I think that this is just an attempt to bait you, not least the recent creation of the account, the speed with which a new account moved to an average 12 posts a day and the association with two recently created sock-puppet accounts.

Be the bigger man and ignore the little tit.

And with that, I too am going to shut up and ask that we keep the nationalism out of it and stick to the question in hand.

[coppice]

I have quite a bit of experience trying to teach chinese engineers and my impression is that there is no actual design that takes place in mainland china 

I have quite a bit of experience teaching Mainland Chinese engineers, and they have exclusively been people doing actual design, and quite often very innovative design, in Mainland China.

Many you just move in the wrong circles.

[NiHaoMike]

In the US, UL/ETL listing is not required if the device does not work with high voltages or other hazardous items like lithium batteries.

[Bark]

In most developed countries you must be a certified electricion to do any electronics for a building - Some countries are so strict on this that it can take 10 years to get the license to do this type of work independently!  I would bet that they keep the liability insurance companies in business 

[Cerebus]

In most developed countries you must be a certified electricion to do any electronics for a building - Some countries are so strict on this that it can take 10 years to get the license to do this type of work independently!  I would bet that they keep the liability insurance companies in business 

C'mon children, less of the playground games:

[OwO]

I personally don't like the "certification and limited liability" way of governance and much prefer the "do whatever you want, but go to jail if your product kills people" model. Corporations seem to always find ways to design shit products that kill people, certification or no certification. It would be much better if the executives in charge would go to jail and be held personally liable for the corporation's actions.

[coppice]

In most developed countries you must be a certified electricion to do any electronics for a building - Some countries are so strict on this that it can take 10 years to get the license to do this type of work independently!  I would bet that they keep the liability insurance companies in business 

You are right that many countries require certification to install and maintain eelctronics in a building, but anyone can design the stuff. Weird, huh?

[Bark]

Even more ironic, the guys doing the end install in the building (the certified electricians) generally have no idea how much of it works (nor do they care to!)

[frozenfrogz]

I personally don't like the "certification and limited liability" way of governance and much prefer the "do whatever you want, but go to jail if your product kills people" model.

I hear what you are saying and agree, that personal responsibility and common sense should be a basic requirement. However, I also think that standardization has its merits in terms of: This is a proper way to implement things. There is no need in reinventing the wheel. The only thing I absolutely hate about standards, is the monetization side, i.e. "pay to play".
In my mind, standards should be freely accessible to anyone and everyone free of charge. But in the real world, companies are pushing their means of doing things through a committee to make it a standard for everyone else. And if you have to implement said standard, you have to pay for getting access to the specifications. That is simply malicious.

[fcb]

A good first step is to talk to your product liability insurer (you do have product liability??? right?), they usually ask pertinent questions.

Unfortuatley if you want to sell worldwide then it is helpful to understand the legislation in each market - many markets have rules that follow closely with the US/EU.  Less of a headache if your product doesn't transmit RF or is connected to mains. If you have competition, download their manuals/user guides and see what standards/certifications they are meeting.

If you need to test, China have some amazing labs and weirdly Japan do as well (each prefecture has at least one lab, and the testing is pretty cheap if you can get it through a 'friend').  We buy standards through the Estonian Standards chaps (www.evs.ee), all done online and around 10x cheaper than through BSI etc..

As others have said - test as part of your design process, not just at the end! 

Anyway, probably worth making sure your product is legal in your home market first.

[worsthorse]

I personally don't like the "certification and limited liability" way of governance and much prefer the "do whatever you want, but go to jail if your product kills people" model. Corporations seem to always find ways to design shit products that kill people, certification or no certification. It would be much better if the executives in charge would go to jail and be held personally liable for the corporation's actions.

[\begin rant]

That's an awesome idea until the product in question harms hundreds or thousands of people before the producer stands trial and goes to jail. Unforunately, given the world's current economic structure, government regulation is the only thing that levels the playing field between giant, wealthy corporations (which by the way are generally created in order to shield individual owners from liability for their actions) and individuals who don't have the resources to bring such corporations to account for destroying their lives.

[\end rant]

[ataradov]

That's an awesome idea until the product in question harms hundreds or thousands of people before the producer stands trial and goes to jail.

But in reality we already have a ton of stuff without certification. And thousands are no harmed.

I doubt corporations with good brand recognition will intentionally make a really unsafe product.

[Cerebus]

I doubt corporations with good brand recognition will intentionally make a really unsafe product.

Sadly quite a few manage to make dangerous products despite the safeguards. The recent record of fires in the UK thanks to intrinsically flawed clothes dryers testifies to this.

We need standards to create a minimum "level playing field", so that people who would design a product down to a price without regard to the consequences can't out-compete people who will be conscientious with product safety and thus have to spend more making a product while selling it into a market with a price established by those with no conscience over the harms their products may cause.

What we have to guard against are standards that set an unnecessarily high standard that acts as a barrier to market entry which favours the big companies (who second people to standards bodies) or which acts as a unfair barrier to trade (thus skirting international legal protections against unfair trade barriers - as proposed by grumpy pigeon or whatever he's calling himself this hour).

Looking at existing emissions standards and, to some extent, safety standards in terms of the compliance testing models and costs that have built up around them, I think we have failed at guarding against the barriers to market entry.

[Mr. Scram]

[\begin rant]

That's an awesome idea until the product in question harms hundreds or thousands of people before the producer stands trial and goes to jail. Unforunately, given the world's current economic structure, government regulation is the only thing that levels the playing field between giant, wealthy corporations (which by the way are generally created in order to shield individual owners from liability for their actions) and individuals who don't have the resources to bring such corporations to account for destroying their lives.

[\end rant]

The huge prices and expensive specialists involved unfortunately also mean a divide is created between wealthy corporations and anyone else. Certification is nothing for major players but effectively bars small outfits from entering the market or at great risk.

[coppice]

That's an awesome idea until the product in question harms hundreds or thousands of people before the producer stands trial and goes to jail.

But in reality we already have a ton of stuff without certification. And thousands are no harmed.

I doubt corporations with good brand recognition will intentionally make a really unsafe product.

PINTO!

[Mr. Scram]

A good first step is to talk to your product liability insurer (you do have product liability??? right?), they usually ask pertinent questions.

Unfortuatley if you want to sell worldwide then it is helpful to understand the legislation in each market - many markets have rules that follow closely with the US/EU.  Less of a headache if your product doesn't transmit RF or is connected to mains. If you have competition, download their manuals/user guides and see what standards/certifications they are meeting.

If you need to test, China have some amazing labs and weirdly Japan do as well (each prefecture has at least one lab, and the testing is pretty cheap if you can get it through a 'friend').  We buy standards through the Estonian Standards chaps (www.evs.ee), all done online and around 10x cheaper than through BSI etc..

As others have said - test as part of your design process, not just at the end! 

Anyway, probably worth making sure your product is legal in your home market first.

Product liability insurers are likely to exploit any and all omissions or mistakes for the sake of dropping you as a customer when claims are being made. Doing your best to do everything right is no guarantee. If you're doing a custom or prototype device I don't see how any insurer would pick up the tab unless you've guilded the lily and jumped through all the hoops.

[worsthorse]

I personally don't like the "certification and limited liability" way of governance and much prefer the "do whatever you want, but go to jail if your product kills people" model. Corporations seem to always find ways to design shit products that kill people, certification or no certification. It would be much better if the executives in charge would go to jail and be held personally liable for the corporation's actions.

[\begin rant]

That's an awesome idea until the product in question harms hundreds or thousands of people before the producer stands trial and goes to jail. Unforunately, given the world's current economic structure, government regulation is the only thing that levels the playing field between giant, wealthy corporations (which by the way are generally created in order to shield individual owners from liability for their actions) and individuals who don't have the resources to bring such corporations to account for destroying their lives.

[\end rant]

Have you ever watched Arrested Development?  This would be a perfect rant to include the "Cornballer" scenes 

I had to do the interweb thing to figure out what you were talking about... it would, wouldn't it?  That said, I am referring less to cornballer level problems and more to stuff like thalidomide or the fiasco with automobile air bags.

[floobydust]

The MBA management school way is to put pressure on to get the product to market ASAP. Profit is king, shareholder return, quarterly numbers - all that matters.
Because safety certifications add a delay to immediate profit, moreso if there are findings and the product needs design changes- it is best to sneak around and circumvent certification.
How I have seen it rationalized:

"It doesn't need to be certified, it can't hurt anyone. It's safe"
"Certify to the oldest, lax standard we can find"
"Chose a crappy agency with idiot certifiers who let anything pass"
"Lie about how the product is actually used, so no testing is really needed"
"Give it no name brand. That way, it's untraceable to us for liability"

Generally, I see Engineering is starved for support and pushed hard to finish the product. You can't actually make something safe in some corporate environments.
Boeing has reached the pinnacle for making unsafe products, after killing hundreds of people. I think something has to change with corporate governance and liability.

[fcb]

A good first step is to talk to your product liability insurer (you do have product liability??? right?), they usually ask pertinent questions.

Unfortuatley if you want to sell worldwide then it is helpful to understand the legislation in each market - many markets have rules that follow closely with the US/EU.  Less of a headache if your product doesn't transmit RF or is connected to mains. If you have competition, download their manuals/user guides and see what standards/certifications they are meeting.

If you need to test, China have some amazing labs and weirdly Japan do as well (each prefecture has at least one lab, and the testing is pretty cheap if you can get it through a 'friend').  We buy standards through the Estonian Standards chaps (www.evs.ee), all done online and around 10x cheaper than through BSI etc..

As others have said - test as part of your design process, not just at the end! 

Anyway, probably worth making sure your product is legal in your home market first.

Product liability insurers are likely to exploit any and all omissions or mistakes for the sake of dropping you as a customer when claims are being made. Doing your best to do everything right is no guarantee. If you're doing a custom or prototype device I don't see how any insurer would pick up the tab unless you've guilded the lily and jumped through all the hoops.

Prototypes and custom units might be covered, although depending on the scenario might also be covered by “professional indemnity” insurance.

Of course doing your best is no guarantee - but I don’t consider doing mandated testing/certification as ‘gilding the lily’, and it’s probably a good idea to get a second opinion on anything that might sail close to the wind.