Decoding the Inscrutable Logos On Your Electronics 140
jfruhlinger writes "If you've bought a piece of electronic equipment — a computer, a printer, even a lowly power supply — you've no doubt noticed a host of inscrutable logos festooned all over it — UL, CE, FCC, TUV, RoHS, ENERGY STAR, and the like. What do they mean? Each of these compliance marks tell a story about your gadget's operation or lifecycle, and knowing what they mean can let you in on the hidden life of the gizmos you buy."
Windows Key (Score:3, Informative)
Article sucks (Score:4, Informative)
Even Wikipedia has better info than that paid article :P
UL: Underwriters Lab - a safety testing outfit
CE: Conformité Européenne (french) - Europe's equivalent of the UL
TUV: Technischer Überwachungsverein - German safety org like the above two
FCC: Federal Communications Commission - they license, test and certify radio equipment (cell phones, wifi, etc)
RoHS: Restriction of Hazardous Substances - a European law restricting hazardous materials such as lead, mercury, and a few others
ENERGY STAR: A set of energy efficiency standards primarily featured in the US, British Commonwealth nations, and parts of Europe. They are typically much stricter than national requirements.
At the end of the day though, most of these are just marketing stickers. Yes, they require some degree of certification, but it's kind of like getting your MCSE or A+. Not having the cert does not necessarily mean your device will blow up or pop breakers, it just means the mfg didn't pay their fee to get certified. For big mainstream appliances it's kind of dumb to not have it, but on most smaller gadgets it's a non-issue.
Re:But only if... (Score:4, Informative)
Hardly. Getting UL certification, or CSA certification is stupidly easy. It all comes down to manufacturing and the quality of it and why 'shit blows up'. An example, back when I was working at a plant that made medium and heavy industrial equipment for the disposal of components of ICBM's, we had everything CSA and UL tested. This test involved a disclosure of the electrical device and how it worked. The CSA certification was similar. This was followed with a POTS test and we could slap the label on.
Besides that we also shipped this stuff to europe, and it had to be electrically certified for Germany, France, and Belgium. At least the wiring codes were easy. I always did like their rubberized 'soft' wiring vs the hardcoat we used here.
Re:Article sucks (Score:1, Informative)
>For big mainstream appliances it's kind of dumb to not have it, but on most smaller gadgets it's a non-issue.
Until it sets on fire and:
- Insurance refuses to pay up for the damage
- You lose your home due to the above
- The electrical supplier sues you for connecting non-compliant devices to their power grid
It is against code in most places to use devices that didn't pass recognized safety standards (your relevant government will have a list of recognized testing labs they can provide you with). That means it is illegal to connect the device to the public utilities and therefore not covered by your insurance.
The same thing can apply to devices that aren't tested for compliance with wireless coverage standards, too. Think ICES, DOC, IC, FCC, whoever does it in your area. In that case, the device doesn't set on fire. Instead, a white van comes to arrest you and you get to pay the government money (lots in most cases).
Re:TFA total mess (Score:5, Informative)
Here's your useful article [anarchius.org].
Re:Article sucks (Score:2, Informative)
Except that:
- The insurance company doesn't care. I know my policy doesn't have any exclusions for nonstandard devices.
- You lose your home from the fire, the insurance company WILL build you a new one unless they actually put an exclusion in your policy. And the "approved" devices start fires too.
- The electrical supplier doesn't care either. I signed nothing agreeing to use only "approved" devices, they'd have a really hard time suing me for it.
It's not against code most places. You don't even assume any more risk most places.
And with wireless, nobody cares as long as you're not creating interference with a licensed user of a frequency. Really, nobody cares. No white vans, no arrests, no fines. It might not be technically legal (or it might be, depending on the frequency) but unless you take the local TV station or the pigs off the air, nobody gives a fuck.
So stop it with the FUD.
Re:But only if... (Score:2, Informative)
If a regulatory standard does not have a publicly accessible database to confirm conformance, it is useless.
This includes the worst such standard of all: the self-certified. See also Ethernet over powerline, RFI and Ofcom.
TUV has an online accessible database: http://www.tuvdotcom.com/ [tuvdotcom.com]
You just type in the certificate number (which is a tiny print under the triangle logo) and you can find everything about the test procedures and even see the signatures of the people responsible for the test.
Disclaimer: I work in TUV.
Re:But only if... (Score:3, Informative)
How much would it interest you to know that the Syma S107 is itself a blatant rip off a product that came before? Or that at this point in the timeline, it's utterly impossible to figure out who actually engineered these things in the first place.
I have a small collection of these heli's as a result of my product research for my webstore. At least 12 different brand names, but only 7 different models. The other 5 are exact copies, with the only changes being stickers/paint/dye.
Even more interesting, the best ones are the most ignored in the greater market. Such as the pico Z. Which is one of the few models of these toys that use a single rotor blade setup, instead of the counter-rotating system that most of them use. The pico Z is interesting because it's obviously an effort to shrink 3D R/C helicopters. They cut a lot out, but in principle the Pico is a micro sized version of it's larger cousins. It has a gyro, it uses a single rotor, it has a full tail rotor and automatic collective mixing (this is a result of the ESC). The down side being that it has no attitude control as a 3d heli would have, so it always flys forward and it's less controllable than the counter-rotating dual rotors, because those kind can hover, where the Pico can't (not really).
Anyway, back on topic - it's my experience (I buy a lot of wholesale from China) that most companies could not possibly care any less about Intellectual property, and only slightly more than that about contractual obligations. As it turns out, if you can find a product you want, and they don't make it , they will go steal the design, the dies and process from someone that has it. Then they'll build the widget for you, at .01c less than the other guy. This sounds like a joke, or bullshit, but I'm not even remotely kidding. I tried to get into Airsoft (legal reasons in the US make it hard). The manufacturer I was working with is a big brand name in the field. As part of my investigations, I went to a trade expo, and as soon as I told anyone I wanted Airsoft, they said "who's?" Turns out they weren't kidding either. I asked for "cheap" copies of all the top lines, and got them. Right down to the misspelled Grock.