Establishment in building automation - required qualifications and certificates

Hello,
Let me start by saying that I am currently still a student of Automation and Robotics. For some time now, I have been thinking about the sensibility of setting up my own home automation business, plus possibly installing traditional electrical installations. This is where various questions arise:

- is a specific qualification required to design a smart building installation (if so, which one)?
- what if I would like to base the automation system on self-made controllers (e.g. avr'ki); As I have initially realised, such a controller should undergo specialised testing. Have any forum members encountered a similar situation and could give their opinion on the subject?
- What about the installation of an electrical system based on a ready-made design - is an SEP license up to 1kV sufficient here?

As I wrote in the introduction - I am asking for discernment. Maybe there are others who are interested in this topic. Then such a collection of information could become helpful.

There have been many discussions on this topic. Have you searched?
Producing your own electronics with certificates is a difficult business. Producing electronics that will be competitive with the Chinese mass-produced stuff is even more difficult.

I have just been browsing through some threads and it is indeed not easy to market my own product. Even if I didn't want to sell these modules in shops, but only install them at customers' premises, I still have to sign a certificate as a manufacturer. And that, as you know, without doing any research, involves too much risk.
For the time being, I will focus on building the system just for myself. If it is useful for a long time, maybe then I will try my hand at producing something like this. .
If anyone has any more practical experience, or is themselves involved in the manufacture and assembly of such systems on a smaller scale - I'd love to hear opinions.

szwychtenberg94 wrote:

As a manufacturer, I have to sign the certificate. And this, as you know, without doing any research involves too much risk.

.
You check the product against the relevant standards and that's it. You issue a CE certificate detailing the standards, that's all the magic.
The only problem is to purchase and study the standards under which the product falls.

marek216 wrote:

The only problem is to purchase and study the standards under which the product falls.

This only seems simple, but it is not so simple.
Where a colleague should start is by learning how to make the constuction-production documentation of the product.
Just making documentation of the finished product is a major skill.

marek216 wrote:

The only problem is to purchase and study the standards under which the product falls.

And commentary

CYRUS2 wrote:

This only seems simplest,but it is not so simple.

.
Have you read with understanding?

CYRUS2 wrote:

What a colleague should start with is learning how to do the constuction/production documentation of a product.

.
Such documentation is often created at the construction stage - then just sorting out the content.

CYRUS2 wrote:

Documentation of the finished product itself is a major skill.

.
As above + a manual written for readers without understanding ( this is indeed a challenge).

I accidentally deleted the post.

Please enlighten us as to what other certificates besides CE are required for placing a device on the market.
In addition, please give me some guidance on issuing a CE certificate - I know that the manufacturer/importer can issue it himself.

marek216 wrote:

Then enlighten us, what other certificates besides CE are required for placing the device on the market.

I did not write about other certificates.
A CE declaration is sufficient for what the author is writing about.

marek216 wrote:

Additionally, I ask for guidance on issuing a CE certificate - I know that the maker/importer can issue it himself.

This is true. But the author of the topic wrote that.

szwychtenberg94 wrote:

as the manufacturer I have to sign the certificate. And this, as you know, without doing any research involves too much risk.

For testing, the product must have technical documentation – not a description of how the prototype was made.

At university, no one talked about technical documentation.
The technical drawing was there - but it's a format, it's still a long way from product documentation.
These formats, you have to be able to number them to begin with.

CYRUS2 wrote:

For testing, the product must have technical documentation – not a description of how the prototype was made.

.
As I see a colleague in the group what thinks everything is secret knowledge. Interestingly most of this "secret knowledge" is accurately described in standards and legislation. With CE certificates it is like registering old vehicles out of circulation and without documents. "Specialists" take serious money for something you can do yourself in a few nights. I have been through this too.

The technical documentation is nothing more than a schematic diagram, a description of operation, means of protection, rules of interaction with other devices if any, etc.
That is to say, everything that is assumed before the design, the defects eliminated during testing, and the technical description of the final device together with its detailed purpose.
Patent documentation is a completely different matter - here it is necessary to prove oneself in order for the patent to be effective and not to be rejected, or not to infringe another patent.

Thanks to such an attitude as yours, despite its excellent engineers and talented technicians, Poland is officially the technological backwater of Europe. Tons of excellent ideas and interesting devices end up in drawers, because their creators, frightened by bureaucracy, do not have the courage to go out into the world with their creation.

CYRUS2 wrote:

I accidentally deleted the post.


Last edited by CYRUS2 on 27 Dec 2017 20:03, edited 2 times in total

Pitu, pitu. Post edited twice - shame I didn't take screenshots.
Just had to go back in the browser - to retrieve the content. For someone out of college, that's poor browser handling.

In response to the deleted question, am I joking:
No, I'm not joking. I see I've come across another paperboy who, in a substantive conversation, instead of continuing edits posts to match what is written later.

Mate is "going" too far already. I suggest stepping back a bit. [retrofood] .

marek216 wrote:

CYRUS2 wrote:

For testing, the product must have technical documentation – not a description of how the prototype was made.

.
As I see a colleague in the group what thinks everything is secret knowledge. Interestingly most of this "secret knowledge" is accurately described in standards and legislation. With CE certificates it is like registering old vehicles out of circulation and without documents. "Specialists" take serious money for something you can do yourself in a few nights. I have been through this too.

.
Mate, it was you who redid it, but not the author of the thread.

retrofood wrote:

Kolego, you were the one who rewrote, but not the author of the thread.

.
That's why I encourage you to seek out the information and do some reading. It is not secret knowledge.
A discouraging attitude is not something that will cause even a twitch in start-ups under the Polish flag, but it will certainly cause more interesting ideas to be consigned to the drawer.

For a start, read binding detective:

2014/35/EU – LVD – Electrical equipment designed for use within certain voltage limits
2014/29/EU – SPVD – Simple pressure vessels
2009/48/EC – TOYS – Safety of toys
89/106/EEC – CPD – Construction products
2014/30/EU – EMC – Electromagnetic compatibility
2006/42/EC – MAD – Machinery
89/686/EEC – PPE – Personal protective equipment
90/385/EEC – AIMD – Active implantable medical devices
92/42/EEC – Efficiency of new hot-water boilers fired by liquid or gaseous fuels
93/15/EEC – EXPLOSIVES – Placing on the market and supervision of explosives for civil uses
93/42/EEC – MDD – Medical devices
2014/34/EU – ATEX – Equipment and protective systems intended for use in potentially explosive atmospheres
94/25/EC – RCD – Recreational craft
2014/33/EU – LIFTS – Cranes
2014/68/EU – PED – Pressure equipment
98/79/EC – IVDD – In vitro diagnostic medical devices
1999/5/EC – RTTE – Radio equipment and telecommunications terminal equipment and the mutual recognition of their conformity
2000/9/EC – PCT – Cableway installations designed to carry persons
2004/22/EC – MID – Measuring instruments
2009/142/EC – Appliances burning gaseous fuels
2007/23/EC – Pyrotechnic articles

In these detectives you have listed which requirements for specific product groups your device must meet.

Added after 30 [minutes]:

Some interesting facts and dry knowledge about CE
https://www.oznakowanie-ce.pl/

marek216 wrote:

This is why I encourage you to seek out the information and do some reading. It is not secret knowledge.

Secret is not, but acquiring this knowledge is difficult. Very often impossible without a teacher.

marek216 wrote:

2014/30/EU – EMC – Electromagnetic compatibility

How much does it cost to do so-called EMC ? .
A trivial question - will a product sold in a small number of copies earn it.
I can assure my colleague that in a small company, the product will not make money on EMC alone.

marek216 wrote:

Some interesting facts and dry knowledge about CE
https://www.oznakowanie-ce.pl/

Author of site incognito, unknown. .
The generalities themselves.
For what purpose this site – I suspect advertising.
Because no one will „hold” the site for free.

CE – it's all in the details.
Overall it looks encouraging. But only in general.

marek216 wrote:

A discouraging attitude is not something that will cause even a twitch in start-ups under the Polish flag, but it will certainly result in more interesting ideas being consigned to the drawer.

I understand my colleague's enthusiasm and intentions. But the current system is based on cash.
There are no people willing to put up the cash in new and uncertain ventures.

Young constructors were in a better situation when Poland was not a member of the EU.

CYRUS2 wrote:

Young constructors were better off when Poland was not a member of the EU.

.
Full agreement.

CYRUS2 wrote:

Because nobody will „hold” a page for free.

.
Myself and a few friends keep various sites quite free and completely pointless from an economic point of view.
Example of a friend's site. http://jakjest.eu/

People also contribute to forums for free - not everyone and not always looking only at profit.