They are coming. I am well ahead with charger testing, but writing and publishing is not going as fast.
No. They are appropriate. Especially since too many people use junk chinese AC devices. Even several people on BLF. I hope the skulls makes people pay more attention. I would like to see the 1, 2 skull ratings added to your reviews as well.
After reading your previous post, I discarded some cheap ones I had ordered. Buying night lights, I found some on Amazon that say UL listed. I am hoping that is sufficient to indicate safety.
Look for items that are sold direct from amazon (not just ships from amazon). Failing that get a major brand and be sure its not mailed direct from china.
maybe a lightning bolt in a no symbol would be less dramatic…but I guess getting fried from unsafe isolation is not a good thing either
thanks for these awesome reviews!
I have changed the first post to use Iframe and if anybody has a problem with it there is a direct link in the second post.
I have also added another cheap charger and there was no surprise, it got:
Many of these cheap chargers a depressing to check, they do not even try to make them safe.
If the ones you give green checkmarks to are available with US plugs from known good sellers, it’d be useful to point those out if anyone can do that.
I’m sure the dangerous ones will be much easier to find (sigh)
I found this at Amazon: OEM HTC USB Travel Charger Adapter U250 / CNR6300 / 79H00095-14M
http://smile.amazon.com/HTC-Charger-Adapter-CNR6300-79H00095-14M/dp/B0047EOBRS/ref=sr_1_fkmr1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1425833100&sr=8-2-fkmr1&keywords="HTC"+"EC250"+usb+power
and lots of people over several years saying it doesn’t work and isn’t from HTC in the reviews, and they’re still selling it
Here, I think, is a real one: Accessories | For Your HTC Smartphone | HTC United States
The ones with checkmark will usual be from the big brands, the ones without checkmark will be the cheaper ones that will usual be fine.
One example is Eachine, it looks perfectly fine and I believe that it will pass a CE test (It probably has), but I cannot do the full range of safety tests and therefore I will not give it a green checkmark.
If anybody has an idea for a symbol to use, please post it. One solution could be a smaller checkmark in brackets: (v)
You could use a green outline checkmark, hollow instead of filled in — I think that’s often enough a way to indicate a somewhat less emphatic approval.
and/or a link to the manufacturer for inquiries about CE or UL certification.
(I know UL marks are supposed to include a unique number that can be looked up because they’re often enough counterfeit marks)
“UL listed” seems to imply that there is a list, which should nowadays be available on line, to look the product up in, to assure that the mark is genuine. But I don’t see the list on the UL Website. I don’t see instructions for checking certification validity on Wikipedia either, though they show a picture of a counterfeit mark, maybe whoever knows the answer should enter it in Wikipedia.
Used this search: check valid Underwriters Laboratory - Google Search
Among first page of hits is the Hong Kong Fire Department, which gives links for checking product certifications (quite a few different certifications)
in the box labeled “Check Listing status at website” on the flowchart:
Here’s the page about the UL marks: new “Smart Mark” as well as the original: https://markshub.ul.com/
Further down that Google search result is:
http://us.tdk-lambda.com/ftp/other/how-safe-is-your-power-supply-article.pdf
If you make the skulls slightly smaller you can fit three on the line if you wanted. For example:
1 - Failed 5000v test
2 - Failed 2500v test
3 - Failed in some other way also
OR you can create a skull icon that is half filled with red and use that for a half skull maybe.
The skulls are good though.
Regarding CE testing - Is it true that if a product passes European CE testing then it is automatically passing UL/US testing because the European testing is more stringent?
Thank you.
Short answer: no
Lots of contries uses the 60950-1 standard for electric safety in IT equipment. It is useable all over the world because safety is graded depending on voltage, i.e. 120VAC does not require as much safety distance as 230VAC, but it does also have some chapters for specific countries.
Before a product is legal is must fulfill many more standards, in CE countries it can be EMC (Does it disturb radio equipment is is disturbed by radio equipment), energy consumption, mechanical safety. Usual a CE "approved" product is delivered with a page saying what standards it fulfills.
Inside CE country you do not need a certificate saying that you are fulfilling these standard, you can just write your own, but any government safety department can ask you (if you are importer or producer) for a technical file that proves the testing and the result and you must provide that within a few days or risk fines and product recall.
UL does their own testing and makes a certificate for you, it is possible to ask them to do both UL and CE tests at the same time and save some money (Something like 60950-1 only have to be tested once).
I have tried adding a small check mark, instead of the empty box. I hope this is better.
Thanks for your great work!
I’m curious about Leagoo 1A Charger I own one and it seems well made and does provide 1A current, but I have no way to test it’s safety and noise. If it’s good it might be a nice cheap option.
I have ordered one.
BG have a few “New arrivals” with the brand Ldnio. They are all descibed as “Safe and easy to use and carry”
Any plan to test any of these?
You can always open up any unknown charger and check it visually to start with. If there is no place on the circuit board where you see a separation of some of the circuit traces from the rest then its isolation may be bad, dangerous. If you do find a decent separation then you can move on to look for a capacitor bridging the two sides. There may not be one but if there is then it must be a safety capacitor (which will have more markings). You can post picture if unsure of anything.
The problem with opening the charger is that it often "destroys" it.
I plan on testing many usb chargers and I will be looking at the suggestions posted here.