CE v CE

[Bill DawesParticipant @billdawes]

Hi all, can’t believe  haven’t noticed before but I was giving my Warco 290V lathe a bit of a brush up and noticed that the CE mark on the nameplate was in fact the Chinese version not the EU one, I spent quite a bit of time a few years ago (and still am) doing documentation for EU Directives and Regulations so well aware that the EU CE symbol has precise proportions, the obvious one is the ‘E’ , (formed like a ‘C’ with a bar in the middle) the bar is inset slightly whereas the Chinese one isn’t.

Not of any great importance to me now after 10 years of ownership, been reliable apart from a replacement stop/start button , the new one is just as rubbish as the old one to be honest, if you hit the start button a bit awkwardly it tilts and jams.

Even tough I hadn’t spotted it a bit surprised this CE thing escaped Warco attention

Bill D.

[Bill Dawes]

On 2 March 2026 at 12:33 Bill Dawes Said:

[…]

Even tough I hadn’t spotted it a bit surprised this CE thing escaped Warco attention

Bill D.

Sorry to say it, Bill … but I find that ‘escape’ unsurprising

MichaelG.

[JasonBModerator @jasonb]

Or is it just a Myth?

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

Incorrect and therefore invald CE marks are not a myth. The “China Export” mark is a myth.

Even big manufacturers get it wrong. I had  Panasonic microwave oven with an incorrect . This was clearly because the entire label, including the serial number had been printed in one process with a fixed font. I noticed when looking at the full art number before trying to buy a replacment boor release button from them. They would not sell me the button as I wasn’t qualifie to fit it (no tools required, no covers to remove…). When I pointed out I was a qualified engineer and by the way your microwave isn’t compliant due to the incorrect mark they stopped responding…

EDIT:
The other big CE/UKCA myth is that it doesn’t apply to individuals, things you arn’t going to sell or items produced for a companies own use. This is not true. If you put an item into use it must be compliant with the relevent directives.

Robert.

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

A bit of light reading

Chinese Export…?

from a presumably respectable source

CE Marking: Your Definitive Guide

MichaelG.

[cedric 1Participant @cedric]

Another self-certification scam. As it says  the CE mark is “a key indicator (not proof)” of anything. Methinks the genuine mark is not worth much more than any fakes that doubtless are around.

[Robert Atkinson 2Participant @robertatkinson2]

The webpage Michael linked to also covers the incorrect application of CE marks to items that don’t need it or should not have it. Components (with a few exceptions like parts of safety interlock sysems)  should NOT be CE marked. This includes VFD’s. Unfortunatly even some of the better manufacturers do this due to market pressures. You can’t CE mark a component because there are too many variables in it’s application. There are standars for VFDs a good example is EN 61800-5-1. However this only covers electrical, thermal and energy safety. It also considers different levels of integration. What people on here talk about as a VFD or “iverter” is considered  Basic Drive Module (BDM). A BDM can hve a certificate of conformity to EN 61800-5-1 but should not be CE marked because it is not a finished product. Using  EN 61800-5-1compliant VFD will of course give the user confidence that the finished product can compliy and helps reduce the amount of compliance work they have to do. Even better is the US version UL 61800-5-1 becuase while EN 61800-5-1 is “self assessed” the UL version requires independent assesment by a Underwriters Laboratory approved entity.
Even if using a 61800-5 compliant VFD you still have to ensure the whole syste it is in is compliant to all relevant directivves (LVD EMC Machinery).

Robert.

[Bill DawesParticipant @billdawes]

I have spent many many many hours compiling EU documentation and all the relevant calculations and issuing of C of C  etc. for the industrial fan company I (still at 84) work for.

My aim is to keep the products and company legal but with the knowledge that we are probably in competition with companies that don’t take it seriously other than issuing the correct documentation.,

Of course now we also have UKCA, fortunately as far as our requirements  are concerned they are a mirror  image of  EU regs.

As already said, the CE mark is no guarantee of compliance as there is no requirement in the main for third party verification. (something like pressure vessels or ATEX Cat.1 hazardous areas would require third party certification.

Bill D.

 

[Dave SParticipant @daves59043]

Given that a CE mark is recognised in the Uk as a valid equivalent for UKCA then there is no reason to UKCA anything – there is no point doing the work twice.

Dave

[Author]

Posts