[Pansophy] SNS PPU inspection traveler breakdown structure

[Mike Dickey]

Gary,

Are you planning to write just 1 INSP traveler for the SEC and 1 for the REC?

Mike Dickey
SRF Inventory Technician
Jefferson Lab
12000 Jefferson Ave
Newport News, VA 23606
(757) 269-7755

From: Pansophy <pansophy-bounces at jlab.org> On Behalf Of Gary Cheng
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2020 4:50 PM
To: Katherine Wilson <kwilson at jlab.org>; Ed Daly <edaly at jlab.org>; Naeem Huque <huque at jlab.org>
Cc: Kurt Macha <macha at jlab.org>; Mark Wiseman <wiseman at jlab.org>; E. Anne McEwen <mcewen at jlab.org>; John Fischer <fischer at jlab.org>; Larry King <king at jlab.org>; Matt Marchlik <marchlik at jlab.org>; Peter Owen <powen at jlab.org>; pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org>
Subject: Re: [Pansophy] SNS PPU inspection traveler breakdown structure

I think I am fine with making one traveler for SEC and one for the REC.
Gary
On 10/12/2020 4:11 PM, Katherine Wilson wrote:
That sounds reasonable to me.  Just FYI, I have put the weld documents into the weld spec on my parts, and then uploaded all of them into the INV traveler, but use your judgment - probably you have more documents.

________________________________
From: Gary Cheng <cheng at jlab.org><mailto:cheng at jlab.org>
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2020 3:58 PM
To: Katherine Wilson <kwilson at jlab.org><mailto:kwilson at jlab.org>; Ed Daly <edaly at jlab.org><mailto:edaly at jlab.org>; Naeem Huque <huque at jlab.org><mailto:huque at jlab.org>
Cc: Matt Marchlik <marchlik at jlab.org><mailto:marchlik at jlab.org>; Peter Owen <powen at jlab.org><mailto:powen at jlab.org>; Mark Wiseman <wiseman at jlab.org><mailto:wiseman at jlab.org>; pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org><mailto:pansophy at jlab.org>; Kurt Macha <macha at jlab.org><mailto:macha at jlab.org>; John Fischer <fischer at jlab.org><mailto:fischer at jlab.org>; E. Anne McEwen <mcewen at jlab.org><mailto:mcewen at jlab.org>; Larry King <king at jlab.org><mailto:king at jlab.org>
Subject: Re: SNS PPU inspection traveler breakdown structure

Thanks Katherine.

Using SEC as an example, I would need to write the following travelers:
1. Visual inspection traveler --- for SRF QC group, i.e. Anne's group
2. Dimensional inspection traveler --- for Survey & Alignment group, end cans won't fit into our CMM machine
3. Weld inspection traveler --- for CWI
4. Instrumentation electrical checkout --- For Larry King's group
5. Vendor docs check --- for SOTR, CWI and leak check specialist
6. Pressure test and leak check --- For CMA

That's a lot to write for just the SEC. Then for the REC, I would need to write another 6 travelers...I don't think that's really what we want. But if PPU management prefers to have such a breakdown structure, I will write 12 travelers for the SEC and REC...someone please let me know.

Gary
On 10/12/2020 3:47 PM, Katherine Wilson wrote:
The idea is to break the travelers down by workstation, so one person is responsible for the part as long as it is being inspected under that traveler.

We are trying to minimize travelers that stay open for months while working through the inspection process, and also reduce misplaced or damaged parts as they are passed from one workstation to another, so please let that be your guide as you decide how to separate the travelers.

I think you will just have to use some judgment about what seems like a sensible way to separate travelers.  Maybe Anne has further suggestions.

Regards,
Katherine



________________________________
From: Gary Cheng <cheng at jlab.org><mailto:cheng at jlab.org>
Sent: Monday, October 12, 2020 3:32 PM
To: Ed Daly <edaly at jlab.org><mailto:edaly at jlab.org>; Naeem Huque <huque at jlab.org><mailto:huque at jlab.org>
Cc: Katherine Wilson <kwilson at jlab.org><mailto:kwilson at jlab.org>; Matt Marchlik <marchlik at jlab.org><mailto:marchlik at jlab.org>; Peter Owen <powen at jlab.org><mailto:powen at jlab.org>; Mark Wiseman <wiseman at jlab.org><mailto:wiseman at jlab.org>; pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org><mailto:pansophy at jlab.org>; Kurt Macha <macha at jlab.org><mailto:macha at jlab.org>; John Fischer <fischer at jlab.org><mailto:fischer at jlab.org>; Larry King <king at jlab.org><mailto:king at jlab.org>; srfinv at jlab.org<mailto:srfinv at jlab.org> <srfinv at jlab.org><mailto:srfinv at jlab.org>
Subject: Re: SNS PPU inspection traveler breakdown structure

Any advice?
On 10/9/2020 11:59 AM, Gary Cheng wrote:
Ed & Naeem,

It's unclear to me if there is a consensus on how many breakdown travelers that PPU project wants to have for a certain assembly to be inspected. I hope that you can clarify what you want all SOTRs to prepare.

The usual receiving inspection steps that I can think of are:
shipping crate condition check --- this would be in INV
vendor documents check --- docs upload to INV. SOTR as well as SMEs need to check them for completeness and correctness
visual inspection --- SRF QC or CMA
dimensional inspection --- may be done by SRF QC folks or Survey & Alignment folks
instrumentation electrical check out --- Larry's group
fit-up test  --- mostly done CMA
weld inspection --- by weld examiner or CWI
cold shock  --- CMA
pressure test  --- CMA
leak check  --- CMA
repackage

Please advise. I am about to convert Ed's SNS end can travelers to the new format and need to know how many travelers that I need to write for Supply & Return End Cans.

Thanks,
Gary





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/pansophy/attachments/20201013/021c6e52/attachment-0001.html>