[Pansophy] C100R WCD

[Tiffany Ganey]

My responses (blue font) in line with your email.

Tiffany Ganey

From: Allen Samuels <samuels at jlab.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 16, 2023 11:58 AM
To: Tiffany Ganey <ganey at jlab.org>
Cc: pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org>
Subject: RE: C100R WCD

Tiffany,

I'm going to try and address the different parts of these emails.


C100R-CAV-INSP-WGD might have been put in twice. On line 25, we have C100R-INSP-WGD. The latter is in the system, but has no data.   C100R-CAV-INSP-WGD was a traveler that I think has been mistakenly removed (https://jlabdoc.jlab.org/docushare/dsweb/View/Collection-44101) .  I created the new C100R-INSP-WGD to be used as part of the typical refurbishment process (which reuses primary waveguides) but the old one was still needed if we were to ever procure new waveguides.  I do not think there is any near term plan to procure new waveguides though so maybe it is better to just keep the C100R-CAV-INSP-WGD traveler archived and I can update the C100R-INSP-WGD (or create a new traveler) if/when we procure new waveguides.

C100R-CAV-INSP-WIN-RCYC is not in pansophy and seems to have been obsoleted. If this was in error, please let us know.  C100R-CAV-INSP-WIN-RCYC was not supposed to be archived because it is supposed to be used for the recycled secondary windows that are installed on the cryomodule by the cryomodule assembly group.  The new travelers I worked on with Greg and Scott were only for the new windows that are used as primary windows normally and installed by the cavity string assembly / cleanroom group.   I'm not sure that Fischer's group is using this traveler though so I'll try to find out if it is still needed.

When it comes to strikethroughs and notes sections, the notes at the end of the excel table were for bringing them to your attention more than anything. However, a way of noting if a traveler has ben obsoleted or not would be good to have. An idea that Valerie and I discussed was doing something with the changelog on the second page where the documents that were obsoleted or need to be obsoleted can be listed.  I think both having an Obsolete / Archived section for easy reference of documents and commenting in the Revision Log which / when / why documents are archived is a good plan.  Then any document not in the Obsolete/Archive section would be active /in-use documents and the Obsolete /Archive section would provide a historical reference.

On a similar note to the last one, whether the solution is within the changelog page or not, it would be good to have a way of officially requesting traveler and procedure removal. That way we have a record of request and completion and aren't having to backtrack if we want to figure out what happened, like with the travelers listed above.
What do you recommend for an official request to have a document archived / obsoleted?  I currently handle this by sending an email but I would welcome a method that had better record keeping.

Also - I am concerned about obsoleting a procedure.  I would not want the procedure "deleted"  - meaning removed entirely from DocuShare such that it could not be found by a project coordinator, work center lead, or other person that does not have full access to DocuShare privileges.  Maybe the project's "06 - Project Documents/Travelers" folder needs an "Archived Documents" folder to move the archived/ obsoleted travelers and procedures to.  This way they can be found if needed for historical purposes or for researching for an upcoming project, but they also would not be confused with an active procedure/traveler.  We have not decided to archive any C100R procedures yet, but I am working on updating some of the cavity string documents and may need to archive a procedure in the future.

Those are my notes from meeting with Valerie. What are your thoughts?

Allen

P.S. C100R-CMA-WIN-WELD is just waiting on Aaron Auston. If you could reach out to him and get him to approve it, I can move the traveler into production.  I will try again.


From: Tiffany Ganey <ganey at jlab.org<mailto:ganey at jlab.org>>
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 3:53 PM
To: Allen Samuels <samuels at jlab.org<mailto:samuels at jlab.org>>
Cc: pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org<mailto:pansophy at jlab.org>>
Subject: RE: C100R WCD

I also noticed that the travelers in the Obsolete list you sent did not line up with the travelers I expected to be Obsolete from the re-organization of the Window and waveguide travelers.  I believe the travelers in the list you sent included all the travelers listed below, but the two highlighted yellow should not be archived.

Travelers:
To be Archived
C100R-CAV-INSP-WGD-RCYC
Yes
C100R-CAV-RWRK-WGD
Yes
C100R-CST-ASSY-WGD
Yes
C100R-FURN-WINW-BRAZ
Yes
C100R-INSP-ADPT
Yes
C100R-INSP-WIN
Yes
C100R-CAV-INSP-WIN-RCYC
No (for secondary windows)
C100R-WELD-WIN-ASSY
Yes
C100R-CAV-INSP-WGD
No (for new waveguides)


Tiffany Ganey

From: Tiffany Ganey
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 3:40 PM
To: Allen Samuels <samuels at jlab.org<mailto:samuels at jlab.org>>
Cc: pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org<mailto:pansophy at jlab.org>>
Subject: RE: C100R WCD

Hi Allen,

I like the addition of an Obsolete/Archived section and have incorporated that into an upcoming revision to the WCD Register.  If a new version of the WCD Register is uploaded and approved with new row(s) in the Obsolete/Archived section, would you then take that as direction to remove that traveler from Pansophy?  If we needed to obsolete/archive a procedure in the Approved Procedures folder in DocuShare, how would that be handled?

The "duplicate" chemistry travelers.  I apparently had the incorrect traveler to archive marked in the WCD Register.  I have corrected this in the upcoming revision to the WCD Register.  I have removed the comment and strikethrough on the traveler to keep, and moved the traveler to be archived to the Obsolete/Archive section.

The two travelers marked as not in Pansophy - C100R-CMA-WIN-WELD is currently waiting on approval (we need this traveler but it has been approved yet) and C100R-CM-ASSY-BPIP I believe is needed though not yet written (I have emailed Fischer to verify).

I'm not strictly opposed to a Notes column; however, I do not want to use the WCD Register for open questions and/or transient conditions for the list.  I would prefer to address questions / concerns about the register through email or regular project meetings.  I could see a case for a Notes column while developing the initial list early in a project when there is a lot of conversation about what is needed; however, I would expect that all the Notes would have been addressed and the column would no longer be needed by the time the register's initial version is sent out for approval.

Instead of adding the Notes column to my upcoming revision, I did add a "First Need Date" column.  I believe it was decided that the first need date did need to be tracked in the WCD Register.  Although for current projects most of the "first need dates" would be backfilled/ estimated, that column would still be used to indicate the first need date of any new travelers added to the register.  In a new project, the first need date would be decided before the travelers and procedures were written and in that case would act as an expected due date for the initial load out of a project.

I've attached my current draft edits to this email; however, I am waiting to hear back from Fischer about the need date for the BPIP traveler before I upload it to DocuShare.  If you still want there to be a Notes column, let me know and I can added it to column L.

Tiffany Ganey

From: Allen Samuels <samuels at jlab.org<mailto:samuels at jlab.org>>
Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 10:33 AM
To: Tiffany Ganey <ganey at jlab.org<mailto:ganey at jlab.org>>
Cc: pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org<mailto:pansophy at jlab.org>>
Subject: C100R WCD

Tiffany,

Valerie and I have been discussing the WCD and have made an updated version. Please review the document and make any changes you deem necessary. The handful of highlighted entries are ones we wanted to bring attention to. If the document is acceptable, please put it in the ready for approvals folder and we'll route and update any remaining NCR and D3 emails.

Allen


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/pansophy/attachments/20230216/003e4f1e/attachment-0001.html>