A shocking reminder (excuse the pun)

[oldticktock]

Although all on here will be aware of the appalling products making their way into the uk market, perhaps a timely reminder at this time of year for friends and family.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-11849914


I did find this quote a tad naive,

"I was absolutely amazed," he said.

"I couldn't believe that such a thing would be sent to the UK for use in our system."



p.s.

Don't you just love the fuse

They do say the hardest part of CE marking is finding the font!

[Skywave]

An extract from that named source & report:

"One is the charred remains of a sandwich-maker. [But] It turns out [that] it contained no thermal fuse, so when it was left on it just got hotter and hotter, until it burst into flames."

Obviously, the item was seriously faulty for it to mis-behave in this fashion.

But what really annoys me about reports like that is the ignorance displayed therein - and the confusion thus caused to the general public. If the device "just got hotter and hotter, until it burst into flames", surely this implies that the temperature control mechanism - thermostat or whatever - was defective, and not [the word "only" is clearly implied in the quote] because "it did not contain a thermal fuse". Obviously, if a thermal fuse had been fitted, it would have prevented a fire, but this has nothing to do with a temperature regulation control.

Al. [Skywave].

[MichaelR]

I am not sure the point you are making here Al , but the report is right in stating that the absence of a thermal fuse caused the fire . Surely if you were to design a sandwich -maker you would consider the possibility of failure of the temperature control and add a thermal fuse into the design.

Mike

[Lucien Nunes]

There are some truly remarkable counterfeit items out there, many of which lack fusing / protection.

Ordinary 'MCBs' to put in your consumer unit, with a little lever on the front that turns the circuit on and off - but nothing else! No overcurrent detection at all. There's no standard commissioning test for a domestic-size MCB so you might never spot it until a short in your lighting circuit had an argument with the 100A board cutout.

The old favourite moulded IEC power cable with unfused moulded plug is easy to spot though if you know what you're looking for, as there's nowhere for the fuse to go. For 15 years these things have been turning up bundled with CE-marked appliances; as soon as trading standards shut down one import route someone finds them elsewhere.

I don't think there is an answer. More regulation doesn't seem useful as criminals don't obey the regulations. Tighter enforcement is difficult because of the sheer numbers of items imported. Perhaps a campaign of consumer education would help reduce the saleability of cheap'n'nasty goods. I wonder how many people actually know what the CE mark means and diligently check for it? How many of those know how easily it can be abused?

And yes, many media reports of these items reveal technical ignorance on the part of the writer, who fails to understand exactly why the item was dangerous.

Lucien

[Skywave]

Originally Posted by MichaelR

I am not sure the point you are making here Al . .
Mike

Hi Mike,

The point is this: the way the report is written, it implies that the omission of the fuse - and this omission alone - was the sole and only culprit that caused the fire. Although I admit that a fuse should be fitted to prevent such an occurence, surely it was the falure of the temperature control device that was the initial cause of the fire. OTOH, if a temperature control was not even fitted, then that was the primary cause of the initial fault, the omission of a fuse being a secondary contributor.

Yes, I do realise that it is a fine line that I am drawing, but the issue that troubles me is that the way the report is written does not help the general non-technical buying-public fully appreciate the basic fundamentals of how these things work and what and how things can go wrong.

Nevertheless, the report obviously has a value and hopefully will be a timely warning to prospective purchasers of such items.

Al.

[MichaelR]

Al ,

I now see your point, unfortunately gone are the days when magazines had technical editors. Today there seems to be the culture that if you get it 70% right it is good enough.

Mike

[Sideband]

This sort of thing is all too common. I also work for a safety test lab (not the one in the article) and we see all manner of items that are just downright dangerous. It seems that there are certain factories in the Far East that will make any component you want and ask you what safety markings you want on it. This happened with an alledged Bulgin plug that I saw once. It looked genuine from a casual look then you see that the finish isn't quite right. Further checks with the manufacturer (Bulgin) then reveal that that particular design is still in their labs and not been released yet. Another fake with very convincing markings.

It's got to the stage where we now test every critical component in a product even if it has safety marks.


SB

[McMurdo]

The direct-import route is no doubt the most risky, a customer of ours has just imported an industrial plastic moulding machine direct from China, it was CE marked yet had no earths on its 3-pin socket outlets, 3-phase motors were all wired in 3-core and the safety guards didnt stop dangerous motions when opened.

[G8HQP Dave]

There is no point looking for the CE mark as in reality it means nothing. How is a consumer supposed to check that the item he is buying, which may bear the name of a "reputable" manufacturer, actually meets the requirements of the relevant Directives? The European brand owner will not have checked, even if the item is not counterfeit. Trading Standards just do a token check every now and then. The factory owners in the Far East know this, so they just regard the CE mark as something you have to put on so that a box can be ticked.

[Skywave]

Yes, Dave: I couldn't agree more. There is clearly a need then for Trading Standards - or some other Government-appointed body (which itself may need to be originated under some EEC Directive) - to vigorously police such issues. But I, for one, am not holding my breath on this aspect.
So perhaps a Government-sponsored campaign of 'Electrical Safety for the Consumer' is called for: newspaper / magazine adverts, on-street bill-boards, Internet, TV & Radio referrals, etc.
Again, I'm not too optimistic about the likelyhood of that happening either. This whole issue of the safety of imported electrical devices seems to condense to caveat emptor - in a technical, but elementary, sense.

Which takes us back to my earlier point.

Al.

[Michael Maurice]

Originally Posted by Skywave

There is clearly a need then for Trading Standards - or some other Government-appointed body (which itself may need to be originated under some EEC Directive) - to vigorously police such issues.

So perhaps a Government-sponsored campaign of 'Electrical Safety for the Consumer' is called for: newspaper / magazine adverts, on-street bill-boards, Internet, TV & Radio referrals, etc.
Al.

You will never be able to stop individuals from importing items from the far east unless the rules are changed so that EVERY item which comes into the UK must be checked possibly by a unit attached to customs.

The only practical way of doing of stopping importers/manufacturers/wholesalers/retailers from selling dangerous equipment is to change the law so that EVERY new line brought into this country is checked and given a safety certificate. Even that wouldn't stop unscrupulous far eastern manufacturers from changing the design after it had been approved.

[MichaelR]

Originally Posted by G8HQP Dave

The European brand owner will not have checked, even if the item is not counterfeit. Trading Standards just do a token check every now and then. The factory owners in the Far East know this, so they just regard the CE mark as something you have to put on so that a box can be ticked.

Not quite true Dave, an importer of goods who does not check for CE certification is liable to be proosecuted if it does not have CE certification. This applies to people buying goods over the internet. The importer is liable.
You are correct about the reality in that even the certidfication that you are provided is dubious at best.
Like everything else if there is no POLICING then what is the point of the regulation, it will be ignored or abused.
CE marking by the way is meeting generally emission and immunity standards not necessarily meeting safety standards.

Mike

[Herald1360]

Isn't CE marked stuff supposed to meet the requirements of all the directives relevant to the product, in this case the Low Voltage Directive as well as the EMC directive?

[Sideband]

More worryingly, some reputable safety test houses have labs in the Far East, notably China and some will pass Chinese products with a wide margin of error...we've checked some that were the subject of a Trading Standards check, one product passed, another didn't and by a big margin. In this case suffice to say it was a heater and it had all the required markings. There was, however, a severe overheating problem concerned with the wiring in the body of the heater...and it wasn't in the 'abnormal use' condition at the time, just ordinary use.

This is brings me to a good point. Products are usually tested in normal conditions and 'abnormal conditions'. This could involve impaired ventillation, voltage overload, damp conditions, being placed too close to a wall.....we have ways of simulating all of these possible conditions and the product has to meet the standard with regard to maximum temperatures. Some of these Far Eastern imports may be OK in normal conditions but could fail miserably when subjected to abuse.


SB

[Skywave]

Originally Posted by Michael Maurice

You will never be able to stop individuals from importing items from the far east unless the rules are changed so that EVERY item which comes into the UK must be checked possibly by a unit attached to customs.

The only practical way . . . .etc . . .

Going to those extremes - idealistic as it may be - is clearly not practical and not at all what I was suggesting.

"Vigorously policing such issues"

could be very simply & effectively implemented by making it well-known that one out of every ten (say) imported batches are checked. And it is unreasonable to expect that the resources HMRC have will be adequate for this purpose: hence my comment, re: "some other Gov't.-appointed body" - e.g. a special unit, explicitely for this purpose - located and operating at bonded warehouses for example, to do this work.

Al.

[Skywave]

Originally Posted by MichaelR

Like everything else if there is no POLICING then what is the point of the regulation? It will be ignored or abused.
Mike

Exactly, Mike. And if there is any flaw in my suggested outline scheme, it will lie therein.

Al.

[G8HQP Dave]

I think the answer has to be some combination of spot checks at the border (HMRC?), and in shops (Trading Standards). At the very least this should be a thorough check of the paperwork - this will catch some of the villains. Some items should have a simple visual inspection: if suppression components are missing from PSU boards or there is no fuse then you don't need an expensive lab to tell you this, a local TV repairer could tell you. Other items should be sent to a lab for full tests. Failures should receive serious fines and serious publicity, together with confiscation of the entire shipment. Three strikes and you are out! - i.e. no more self-certification.

The current practice is based on the idea that most people are honest, and even the dishonest ones would be ashamed if they are caught. This does not apply in some quarters. The solution is to make it more expensive for them to cut corners.

This would cost money, but in the long run could save money for the UK. Consumers would not waste so much money on dangerous junk. It might save a few house fires and electrocutions - these are expensive for all of us, quite apart from the effect on the people concerned. Reputable factories would face fairer competition.

[murphyv310]

In relation to the first few posts of this thread. I really must point out that a properly designed unit of this type will have a thermostat, either preset or adjustable by the user, this will stop the element burning the food, it also should have a thermal fuse that will trip if the element gets too hot (above the maximum thermostat setting).
The fitment of a 13a plug top fuse is mandatory in the UK NOT just to protect the cable that some here believe but also to protect the unit and of course the plug and cable, OK we realise there should be a thermostat and thermal fuse but what happens if the element shorts or a connection fails inside the unit?

The next thing though is our obsession with cheap and nasty goods, perhaps if we were not always so entrapped with wanting a bargain we would have an industry in this country!

[Skywave]

Yes, Trevor - the second sentence of your Post above: my point exactly; thank you.

Al.