[Pansophy] SNS PPU inspection traveler breakdown structure

[Gary Cheng]

Mike,

Yes. Unless I am forced to write 6 travelers per end can or a total of 
12 travelers for the SEC and REC. I don't see much technical merit in 
writing 12 travelers for a set of end cans.

Gary

On 10/13/2020 8:19 AM, Mike Dickey wrote:
>
> 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/a2970fb3/attachment-0001.html>