There is a specific reason for the content and structure of product safety reports in general, and UL FUS reports in particular.
Older reports are stored as separate image and/or rtf files; where the construction details (which become the 'FUS' report) are separate from each test data file. UL reports done in the last several years are based on IEC-style TRFs, so it would be a matter of reconstructing the files to look like a CB test report. Note that, when the originator logs into UL's CDA site, each 'report' is stored in multiple .rtf, gif, and/or jpeg files. So you probably got what was directly downloaded from UL. If you are not the compliance specialist, the we can assume that you will send the report to the person that does your product assessment - let this person sweat the details. As long as you have all of the required test and construction documents, just do the happy dance. But if you must, just order-up the files and pour them into a single PDF doc. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]]On Behalf Of George Stults Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2009 11:43 AM To: [email protected] Subject: a question on safety report formats Hi Folks, When I recently asked an OEM for a UL EN60950-1 safety report for an ITE product, instead of the usual single PDF, compiled with all the required sections, I got a zip file containing all the sections as loose-leaf rtf and jpg documents. In this case, there were sections from an original report, an amendment the following year, and a later report that same year. If this were a simple report I could just compile it into a single PDF by referring to similar examples, but that is not the case here. I don't even know where to start with this and the OEM doesn't seem to have the expertise either. Since it was a UL report, I called UL to talk about it, however, they were only able to respond that they couldn't comment on the report because it's the proprietary information of a customer. Well, that can't be the whole answer. Surely there are standard(s) that govern what goes in this report, therefore, my question (as to the completeness and the order of sections in the report) can be answered without using the proprietary information of a customer, other than that contained in the file that was released to my company. How else could any inspector evaluate a safety report? Short of taking enough classes in Safety Engineering (I'm not opposed, but there is no budget at this point), is there a good way to sort this out, or at least work around it? If I asked UL a different question or approached it from a different angle, might they give a more useful answer? Any perspective on this would be appreciated. Right now it feels like being in an episode from the Twilight Zone.... Best Regards, George Stults WatchGuard Technologies Inc. - This message is from the IEEE Product Safety Engineering Society emc-pstc discussion list. To post a message to the list, send your e-mail to <[email protected]> All emc-pstc postings are archived and searchable on the web at: http://www.ieeecommunities.org/emc-pstc Graphics (in well-used formats), large files, etc. can be posted to that URL. Website: http://www.ieee-pses.org/ Instructions: http://listserv.ieee.org/request/user-guide.html List rules: http://www.ieee-pses.org/listrules.html For help, send mail to the list administrators: Scott Douglas <[email protected]> Mike Cantwell <[email protected]> For policy questions, send mail to: Jim Bacher: <[email protected]> David Heald: <[email protected]>
