 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsElectronicsBasicsRepairDesignCADComponentsEquipmentElectrical Engineering ElectronicsKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Electronics Forum / Electronics / September 2007US consumer products design reference - what inventors should know
What safety or design codes are required in US consumer products? To narrow it down lets say home appliances using either wall or battery power 120vac max with digital/analog circuits but no intentional radiators. For example: food processors, foot massagers, stereo equip. If I were the inventor of the Vego-Pedi-Pod(tm), and wanted to mass market them, how would I find the applicable laws and codes? Any books that walk you thru the process? I am aware of a few safety and regulation agencies such as CE, UL, CSPC, FCC. While CE codes seem to be the law overseas, UL and CSPC codes appear to be only suggestions, and afaik, not requirements. In the case of the UL, they are expensive requirements since the cost to even read them approaches $1k per document (what a scam). So far the only real requirements I have seen for this category of product is FCC part 15. Surely there are more? > What safety or design codes are required in US consumer products? > To narrow it down lets say home appliances using either wall or battery [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > So far the only real requirements I have seen for this category of product > is FCC part 15. Surely there are more? If it is not a medical device or a device to be used in an explosive environment (or other iffy situations) and does not radiate so as to potentially interfere with other applications/devices and is line-operated, the biggie is UL Approval. Then, of course, there is the area of potential liability. Infant monitoring devices are just one example. One must tread carefully in such areas. >>What safety or design codes are required in US consumer products? >>To narrow it down lets say home appliances using either wall or battery [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > monitoring devices are just one example. One must tread carefully in such > areas. Yes, it wouldn't do to have the Vego-Pedi-Pod(tm) remove someone's toenail while they are tuning the equalizer! But you are right, toddlers and lawers go hand in hand. Potential liability has kept more than one great product off the market. I was wrong about the CPSC. Some of their recommendations have become law, but they cover a very limited range of products (bicycles, lawn darts, power cords). While the UL seems to have categories for a wider range of products, the website states that submission of products to be tested is strictly voluntary and that if there are any laws requiring compliance to UL code, they can't be bothered to keep track of them. Too busy counting money ya'know. It does seem like lots of products have the UL mark, but then again, many don't. With 1000's of products on the market I have to assume there is some publication or source these designers and manufacturers have followed to meet just the regs applicable to their product for the markets they want to sell in. I just haven't found it yet. >>>What safety or design codes are required in US consumer products? >>>To narrow it down lets say home appliances using either wall or battery [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > followed to meet just the regs applicable to their product for the > markets they want to sell in. I just haven't found it yet. This standards thing has gone beyond ensuring that products are safe, has become a whole parasitic industry. By making it complicated enough, you now probably have to hire some consultant, just to tell you which $1000 standards you need to buy, which will then tell you to do things you were going to do anyway, and then you can look forward to the cost of the testing. If this product is for technically minded users, maybe you could do it as a semi-assembled kit, which probably avoids some of the difficulties, at the expense of requiring a lot more customer support. If there were a government that really wanted to have a lot of start-ups, then that country would either buy outright, or create from scratch a complete set of standards, make them as strict in every respect as the strictest of the widely used standards in the rest of the world, declare that they are legally adequate standards for products sold in their country, and then place the lot in the public domain. I think that it would be interesting if someone were to compile a list, by country, of the overhead cost of starting company and selling an electronic product, the "null product" - where we assume that the design itself is trivial, but just count the cost of buying standards, health and safety audits, compliance testing fees, government bribes^H^H^H^H^H^Hregistration fees, WEEE registration etc. If this list were published every year, it might focus the attention of certain politicians on the reason why they seem to have so much trouble reducing unemployment and achieving positive balance of payments. Chris > This standards thing has gone beyond ensuring that products are safe, has > become a whole parasitic industry. By making it complicated enough, you [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > Chris Well said. How can it be that a private company, and a claimed non-profit organization, has managed to appoint itself as the sole arbiter of product safety, yet keep the standards themselves such a well-guarded secret? Our laws are not secret, public safety should not be either. The document pricing, restrictive licensing, and secretive way the UL guards their IP, all show the goal is more profit oriented than safety oriented. Heck, maybe Microsoft should apply for not-for-profit status. I have no doubt that consumer products are safer having been designed to set standards, but once those standards become a requirement (in essence, the law) the text should be freely available, or at least reasonably priced. Even thick technical books rarely cost more than $100, mainly due to competition. Only a monopolistic entity could get away with charging so much more for similar information. I noticed my latest monitor has at least a dozen certification marks on the back. Why so many, since I believe CE meets or exceeds most of them. Maybe its time for a comprehensive set of open standards? >> This standards thing has gone beyond ensuring that products are safe, has >> become a whole parasitic industry. By making it complicated enough, you [quoted text clipped - 46 lines] > the back. Why so many, since I believe CE meets or exceeds most of them. > Maybe its time for a comprehensive set of open standards? Yes, but you'll need a bunch of "lobbyists" with sufficient cash to grease the right politicians, or it will never get adopted, and therefore will not allow you to sell products. I think there is something called the "official journal" or something like that in the EU, which is a list of the standards that the governments will admit to having heard of. I think it is probably expensive to get on that list. There would be enough competent people and companies who are sick of being ripped off, that actually coming up with the technical content of the standards would probably not be the hard part. Chris > It does seem like lots of products have the UL mark, but then again, many > don't. With 1000's of products on the market I have to assume there is > some publication or source these designers and manufacturers have followed > to meet just the regs applicable to their product for the markets they > want to sell in. I just haven't found it yet. I too have no idea about a single source that is reliable and up to date. I worked for a small company years ago and we went for UL approval (and eventually received it). We were forced to do so because most retailers will not even consider a line-operated gizmo that lacks UL approval. They feel that if they sell such a product they would be vulnerable to a wide range of litigation. I really can't blame them. By the way, I honestly felt that the UL approval process added not one tad of safety to the product we had designed. They demanded some picayune changes that were silly. The UL approval process (back then) was torturous, bureaucratic and fraught with delays. It was very frustrating. It is becoming more and more difficult for a small enterprise to enter the manufacturing sector. This is not a good thing. However, it is also not a good thing to have blatantly dangerous products. I have mixed emotions about this whole thing. Your best bet is to have an patent attorney look after your interests. You should be in contact with the various standards organizations. It is costly, but this is part of the investment. Getting free information from various non directly approved sources would not be considered legally admissible in court when applying for a patent, or when fighting a defence case because of an overlooked problem.  SignatureJANA _____ What safety or design codes are required in US consumer products? To narrow it down lets say home appliances using either wall or battery power 120vac max with digital/analog circuits but no intentional radiators. For example: food processors, foot massagers, stereo equip. If I were the inventor of the Vego-Pedi-Pod(tm), and wanted to mass market them, how would I find the applicable laws and codes? Any books that walk you thru the process? I am aware of a few safety and regulation agencies such as CE, UL, CSPC, FCC. While CE codes seem to be the law overseas, UL and CSPC codes appear to be only suggestions, and afaik, not requirements. In the case of the UL, they are expensive requirements since the cost to even read them approaches $1k per document (what a scam). So far the only real requirements I have seen for this category of product is FCC part 15. Surely there are more? >What safety or design codes are required in US consumer products? >To narrow it down lets say home appliances using either wall or battery [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] >So far the only real requirements I have seen for this category of >product is FCC part 15. Surely there are more? You might want to go to groups.google.com and read back through the sci.engr.electrical.compliance newsgroup. It's not very busy right now, but there's been a lot discussion in the past couple of years. Mark Zenier mzenier@eskimo.com Googleproofaddress(account:mzenier provider:eskimo domain:com) |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.