[Pansophy] C100R FPFT inspection traveler updated drafts for approval

[Liang Zhao]

Hi Allen,

I have some comments on the draft that you edited:

I don't think it is necessary to put Anne's name on the NCR dispositioner. Instead it makes sense to have Danny be one of the dispositioner as he is heavily involved in choosing and using the field probe. So I suggest the email names be:
NCR informative: areilly,overtonr,georged,mosby
NCR dispositioner: lzhao,forehand,ganey
D3 emails: areilly,overtonr,lzhao,forehand,ganey,georged,mosby

About the drawing:
The drawing with blue rectangles shows the the incoming ordered probes are still based on the CRM-100-7014-0010 drawing, but it masks up some outdated information not needed for inspection of this coming purchase order.
If the mod drawing link does not work under current rules, I wonder is it possible to put a link of the PR int he reference instead to reflect the changes made in purchasing these field probes.

The other changes  you made look good to me.

Tiffany may have her opinion on the above comments. I'd like to hear what she thinks as well.

Thanks,
Liang
________________________________
From: Allen Samuels <samuels at jlab.org>
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2024 3:33 PM
To: Liang Zhao <lzhao at jlab.org>
Cc: pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org>; Tiffany Ganey <ganey at jlab.org>
Subject: RE: C100R FPFT inspection traveler updated drafts for approval


Thank you Liang. I’m looking over them right now.

Just a heads up going forward, drawings should link to their versions in the jlab docs repository<https://misportal.jlab.org/jlabDocs/nodes/127/search>, not docushare anymore. I’m working on updating the links on these for you so you don’t have to worry about the links for these, just use it for future travelers and revisions (use the file upload link on the document listing. It won’t work if you click it in word, but it will in pansophy).



One question I did have about the drawings, I’m working on C100R-INSP-FPFT-R2 and I noticed that your version has blue rectangles covering up parts of the drawing, while the doc repository version does not. Do these measurements need to remain redacted? I’ll update with the assumption that it’s fine, but if it’s not we’ll have to figure something out. For context, see the images below



[cid:image003.png at 01DAD14C.2A2294C0]

[cid:image004.png at 01DAD14C.2A2294C0]





Allen



From: Liang Zhao <lzhao at jlab.org>
Sent: Monday, July 8, 2024 2:23 PM
To: Allen Samuels <samuels at jlab.org>
Cc: pansophy <pansophy at jlab.org>; Tiffany Ganey <ganey at jlab.org>
Subject: C100R FPFT inspection traveler updated drafts for approval



Hi Allen,



I put three travelers in the ready for approval folder for C100R:

C100R-INSP-FPFT-R2

C100R-CMA-FPFT-LEAK-R1

C100R-VTA-FPFT-CSHK-R1



Could you help with getting them into Pansophy?



Thanks,

Liang
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/pansophy/attachments/20240709/305248f5/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 180998 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/pansophy/attachments/20240709/305248f5/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image004.png
Type: image/png
Size: 107578 bytes
Desc: image004.png
URL: <https://mailman.jlab.org/pipermail/pansophy/attachments/20240709/305248f5/attachment-0003.png>