[Pansophy] Prep for NCR meeting Friday

[George DeKerlegand]

Hi Anne,

The NCR analysis looks great. It clearly shows those pesky scratches were a big problem during L2 inspections.  I do have a question and also some suggestions. I was wondering if a pansophy user creates a NCR, but doesn't select a NCR check box category how would that NCR be categorized? I can't imagine this happening often, but just curious how this would be evaluated?

For the current NCR categories I propose we combine any checks done w/ cmm into one category.  For example, we currently have parallelism and flatness categories.  Yet, there are many other dimensions checked w/cmm like diameter and overall length. I was thinking maybe we combine all these types into one "dimensional" category.

Thank you,
Aaron


________________________________
From: E. Anne McEwen <mcewen at jlab.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 25, 2020 7:34 AM
To: George DeKerlegand <georged at jlab.org>
Cc: Valerie Bookwalter <bookwalt at jlab.org>; Liang Zhao <lzhao at jlab.org>; pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org>
Subject: FW: Prep for NCR meeting Friday


Hi Aaron



There has been an effort by Naeem to update the lessons learned for LCLS-II (requested by Joe Preble)



Attached is an analysis of L2 NCRs by Liang (with comments from Valerie & myself) where Liang identifies defect types that are unclear and/or have problems



To bring this to a conclusion where there can be recommendations for the lessons learned report  , there is a meeting set up on Friday afternoon with some of the SMEs (I will check that you are invited)



I have asked Valerie to propose some recommendations for defect categories so we have a starting place for the meeting Friday – she set the first draft late last night – I have it attached.



As you are working from home today – could you please look over the suggestions and let us know if you have comments before the meeting



We need to be careful to not create too many categories of defect otherwise the Pareto loose meaning. Normal recommended by ASQ is no more than 10 categories + “other”



Please take a look and let us know if you have comments – happy to set up another pre meeting today if it helps ,



Thanks Anne



From: E. Anne McEwen
Sent: Wednesday, June 24, 2020 3:01 PM
To: Valerie Bookwalter <bookwalt at jlab.org>; Liang Zhao <lzhao at jlab.org>
Subject: Prep for NCR meeting Friday



Hi Valerie & Liang



For the NCR meeting on Friday I was going to start with the intro attached  - then I was thinking that Liang could go through the report for L2 to explain her recommendations



For a Pareto , normally you want no more than ~ 10 types + Other -  if too many types the chart no longer tells you anything



I suggest in advance of the meeting we should have a proposal for what the new categories should be – and look for the group to validate that they agree (or not)



I will look for a time when we can discuss to make sure we are on the same page in advance of the meeting on Friday



Anne

_______________________________________________________________________________

E. Anne McEwen

JSA / Jefferson Lab

SRF Institute

Newport News, VA 23606

Office: +1 (757) 269-5539

Email:   mcewen at jlab.org<mailto:mcewen at jlab.org>


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/pansophy/attachments/20200625/d326f14c/attachment.html>