declaration of conformity

[Esselle]

Good morning, a question that for you experts may also be trivial, but this aspect is not clear to us.

a manufacturer must draw up the declaration of conformity of a machine and for this purpose the declarations of conformity of the components used : hydraulic central, hydraulic system, plant and electrical framework, laser indicator are delivered.

the declaration of conformity of the machine drawn up by the final manufacturer must contain references to the harmonized standards cited by the manufacturers of the components or is sufficient reference to the only harmonized standards to which the final manufacturer has adhered?

Thank you so much!

 

[gerod]

Good question!
What does the directive say?

where necessary, reference to the harmonized rules referred to in Article 7(2) which have been applied;

Therefore, since the end user sees your statement, I would say that those applied should be written. attention that others have applied the rules correctly and above all verify that they are not expired.
I would check in before you wrote the rules you used.

 

[Esselle]

Good question!
What does the directive say?

Therefore, since the end user sees your statement, I would say that those applied should be written. attention that others have applied the rules correctly and above all verify that they are not expired.
I would check in before you wrote the rules you used.

Thanks for the answer!

so it takes a check on all statements made by the manufacturers of "components" and then the rules they used are to be reported.

In fact it was what I thought, too, thank you for giving me the certainty.

p.s. and I tell you that there are those who still hand over manuals with statements that refer to Directive 98 and without any reference to the applied norms...chapter from which base do you depart? ? ?

 

[gerod]

the control takes us because in the end it is you who declares everything in conformity!
Trust those who brand cars still with 98/37/ce but don't be surprised because I, a short time ago, found a statement still with the old 89/392.

 

[Esselle]

the control takes us because in the end it is you who declares everything in conformity!
Trust those who brand cars still with 98/37/ce but don't be surprised because I, a short time ago, found a statement still with the old 89/392.

but the machine sold today and with declaration of conformity dated 2007 and conforms to 98/37/ce is in order?

 

[gerod]

No.
Today you put in the market so I demand that the marking is referred to the laws of now not yesterday.
we talk about first input.

 

[Esselle]

No.
Today you put in the market so I demand that the marking is referred to the laws of now not yesterday.
we talk about first input.

Thank you again!

 

[Fulvio Romano]

the control takes us because in the end it is you who declares everything in conformity!
Trust those who brand cars still with 98/37/ce but don't be surprised because I, a short time ago, found a statement still with the old 89/392.

I found construction safety plans referring to 626... the world is full of them.

the declaration of conformity of the machine drawn up by the final manufacturer must contain references to the harmonized standards cited by the manufacturers of the components or is sufficient reference to the only harmonized standards to which the final manufacturer has adhered? !

Therefore, since the end user sees your statement, I would say that those applied should be written.

the answer of gerod is sibillina.. .
those applied... from manufacturer or manufacturer + component suppliers and almost maccchine?
I would like to interpret as the first.

So?

 

[Esselle]

the answer of gerod is sibillina.. .
those applied... from manufacturer or manufacturer + component suppliers and almost maccchine?
I would like to interpret as the first.

So?

that it was of two interpretation I thought it myself and in fact I answered with:

So it takes control of all the statements made by the manufacturers of "components" and then the rules that they used are to report.

without questioning directly, since it has not denied me should be, unfortunately, so or not?

Of course going to buy and consult rules that arise from the main field of work is certainly a dangerous waste. . .

 

[gerod]

consult them when necessary, as the directive says!

lightning is right, but you're always the manufacturer and you need to know what you're doing.
You're the last wheel of the carriage, unfortunately, and those before you could do the tricks.

 

[Esselle]

excuse, but I continue not to understand, the harmonised norms used by the suppliers of parts should be reported in the declaration of conformity that the manufacturer-assembler final? that then should be known and read it seems to me in any case necessary, but the question is only about writing on the declaration of conformity "final" the answer to the norms indicated by the suppliers, even if the manufacturer only purchased those materials.

Sorry for the insistence... .

 

[gerod]

we are in a forum.
What I say is therefore not "consulence" but my opinion.
I make an example:
I have to build a lifting accessory that is made with a certain type of material.
I ask the supplier the certificate of origin of the material that is generally given as an acronym and a reference standard.
I carry in the statement that norm and type of material. I didn't use the norm but I used the material. I trust the manufacturer/manufacturer of the material.

for a robotic island put norm 10218-1 or not? The manufacturer actually uses it, but me? I say yes, I could use it, and it's still part of the robot.

other example: you are the manufacturer but do absolutely nothing about electrical picture and wiring machine edge. you make a declaration of conformity of the picture pursuant to en 60439-1 and wiring under 60204-1. You didn't even see them but, being the manufacturer of the machine, you have to quote them!

so you use yours and those on other statements. I remember the voluntaryity of the norms so you can choose.

 

[Esselle]

we are in a forum.
What I say is therefore not "consulence" but my opinion.

so you use yours and those on other statements. I remember the voluntaryity of the norms so you can choose.

Thank you! It is clear that what you write here cannot be taken as advice but only as a personal opinion, however voluntary, but it was not clear to me your thinking.