<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<font face="Calibri">Any advice?</font><br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 10/9/2020 11:59 AM, Gary Cheng
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:e36c9049-bd76-b326-f9b8-08633f560227@jlab.org">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<font face="Calibri">Ed & Naeem,<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
The usual receiving inspection steps that I can think of are:<br>
shipping crate condition check --- this would be in INV <br>
vendor documents check --- docs upload to INV. SOTR as well as
SMEs need to check them for completeness and correctness<br>
visual inspection --- SRF QC or CMA<br>
dimensional inspection --- may be done by SRF QC folks or Survey
& Alignment folks<br>
</font><font face="Calibri"><font face="Calibri">instrumentation
electrical check out --- Larry's group</font><br>
fit-up test --- mostly done CMA<br>
weld inspection --- by weld examiner or CWI<br>
cold shock --- CMA<br>
pressure test --- CMA<br>
leak check --- CMA<br>
repackage<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Gary<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</font> </blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>