[Pansophy] SNS PPU Cold Mass 01 D3's SN and SNType

[Gary Cheng]

All,

I've been chatting with Naeem. It seems that first of all, CMASS-ASSY 
traveler's SN acronym for cold mass is changed to CMSN, not the CMASSSN 
that I had in my original traveler. Panysophy team must have changed 
that for some reason.

CMSN implies cryomodule SN. Are we sure cold mass 01 will definitely end 
up being used for CM-01? And cold mass 02 for CM-02...as we know, 
LCLS-II's cavity string 6 was terminated.

Jacob, maybe you can give us some guidance on this.

Thanks,
Gary

On 8/11/2021 10:25 AM, Matt Marchlik wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>
> D36 covers the tophat bellows cuff issue in general, so I wouldn't 
> expect it to list the tophat bellows SN. We should expect to see this 
> D3 repeated for the next 7 CM assemblies. May we keep the current SN 
> of PPU-01 and use the correct one for the remaining 7 assemblies or 
> can D3-36 be administratively unresolved so I can change it?
>
> Thanks,
> Matt
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Gary Cheng <cheng at jlab.org>
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 11, 2021 10:05 AM
> *To:* Jared Martin <jared at jlab.org>; Matt Marchlik 
> <marchlik at jlab.org>; Naeem Huque <huque at jlab.org>; John Fischer 
> <fischer at jlab.org>
> *Cc:* Ed Daly <edaly at jlab.org>; Jacob Harris <jharris at jlab.org>; 
> pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org>; srfinv at jlab.org <srfinv at jlab.org>
> *Subject:* SNS PPU Cold Mass 01 D3's SN and SNType
> All,
>
> The recently released D3 33 and 36 for PPU cold mass 01 have the same 
> SN: PPU-01 and SNType: ID. These don't appear correct to me.
>
> SRF spec/procedure PR-P-007 (attached) defines the format of S/Ns. So, 
> to me, the SN for cold mass 01 should be 104211500-A002-A-001.
> As to the SNType, CMASSN should be used.
>
> The two specific D3 #33 & #36 address two issues associated with two 
> types of parts, the G-10 isolators and FPC bellows, respectively. If a 
> D3 is intended to address an issue with one certain part, e.g. only 
> one of the four FPC bellows, then I think the D3 should use the SN for 
> that specific bellows and SNType should be what we created for the FPC 
> bellows.
>
> Comments are welcome.
>
> Gary

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/pansophy/attachments/20210811/a26d2ea7/attachment.html>