QA concerns about mid tray production
November 25, 2003
LAT QA (Marsh, Cullinan, and
Gobin) has concerns about tray assembly processes not being well defined or
specified. It would seem appropriate to
include all the processes for tray assembly, non-destructive testing, cleaning,
etc. in the Tray Panel Assembly Procedure LAT-PS-01584. That way the drawings notes can reference
LAT-PS-01584 for specific assembly processes.
LAT QA will need to make
sure all of these processes are in place, are reviewed, approved and followed
by Plyform. It is understood Plyform
Travelers are considered proprietary (and are in Italian) and cannot be sent to
SLAC for review. Any review of Plyform
traveler process documentation will require English translation.
With regards to the action
items generated by Robert Johnson, LAT QA provides the following information to
clarify and supplement the requirements necessary prior to starting flight
production of the Tracker Mid-Tray Panels.
1. Paragraph 6.3 (Non-Conformance Reporting) of the Tray Panel
Assembly Procedure, LAT-PS-01584, is not acceptable.
LAT QA recommends the
following nonconformance reporting requirements:
NON-CONFORMING MATERIAL
Supplier shall ensure that
Tracker Trays that do not conform to requirements are identified and controlled
to prevent their unintended use or delivery.
The controls and related responsibilities for dealing with nonconforming
tray assemblies shall be defined in a documented procedure. Supplier's documented procedure shall define
the responsibility for review and authority for the disposition of
nonconforming product and the process for approving personnel making these
decisions.
DEFINITIONS
Nonconformance: A condition of any article, material or
service in which one or more characteristics do not conform to requirements
specified in the drawings or specifications as defined herein and other
approved procedures. This includes
failures, discrepancies, defects, anomalies, and malfunctions.
Rework: Used when an article
can be made to conform to drawing requirements. Detailed instructions must be
included or referenced. Rework is
considered routine when it is covered in a released and approved procedure
document that is performed on conditions specified in the assembly procedure or
organization quality assurance documentation.
Repair: Used when the
nonconforming article, material or service can be corrected to a usable
condition, although its condition may not be identical with
drawing/specification requirements.
Repair is not permitted without MRB approval.
Major Nonconformance: Nonconformanes found as a result of test
activities, inspection activities, or discrepant product that cannot be used,
with or without modification, for its original intent.
Minor Nonconformance: Nonconformances not classified as major and
for which the cause of the nonconformance is fully known and for which
immediate action can be taken to correct the deficiency.
NONCONFORMANCE PRELIMINARY
REVIEW
The preliminary review
process shall be initiated with the identification and documentation of a
nonconformance. A preliminary review
shall be the initial step performed by Supplier to determine if the
nonconformance is minor and can be reworked to a condition that completely
conforms to the drawing or specification requirements. Note: preliminary review does not negate the
requirement to identify, segregate, document, report, and disposition
nonconformances.
NONCONFORMANCE REPORTING
Supplier's procedures for
handling non-conforming-material are to be followed during tray assembly
fabrication. Once any step in the tray
assembly process has begun, nonconformances detected shall be documented and
reported to INFN and SLAC under the following conditions:
* Any time a nonconformance is detected during in-process assembly
or inspection activities,
* A failure of any portion of testing,
* Any time a nonconformance is detected during final inspection.
DATA REQUIREMENTS
Nonconformance reports shall
include a detailed description of the nonconformance, the location of the
nonconformance (by part number, tray serial number, drawing reference point,
hardware reference point, clock location, etc.), and an exact callout of the
violation by drawing or specification requirement (including sub-paragraph or
illustration number). It shall also
list what type of inspection revealed the discrepant condition, and what, if
any, subsequent actions were taken prior to disclosure. Dimensional violations shall include
"should be" and "is" dimensions. Nonconformance reports shall also document the root cause of the
nonconformance and corrective action taken to prevent the root cause from recurring. All nonconformances reports must be closed
before trays can be shipped.
MATERIAL REVIEW BOARD
Supplier shall provide
management and engineering support to the GLAST LAT Material Review Board
(MRB). The GLAST LAT MRB is chaired by
the GLAST LAT Product Assurance Manager and consists of end-item responsible engineers
and specialty engineers, as appropriate.
At a minimum, Supplier participation shall include the engineer
responsible for the product described herein and a Quality Assurance
representative.
Major nonconformances
identified during production of flight tray assemblies shall be documented on a
Non-Conformance Report and submitted to the GLAST LAT MRB for review and
disposition. All work on the defective
item shall cease until the MRB review is complete and work instructions for
returning the item to compliance have been established.
2. Paragraph 6.4 (Independent Source Inspection), of LAT-PS-01584,
Tray Assembly Procedure is not acceptable.
LAT QA recommends the following:
An INFN engineer is to be
resident at Plyform for tray assembly production activities. Independent inspections will be performed
where identified on the production traveler by INFN. Independent source inspections will be performed by INFN and SLAC
Quality Assurance on a periodic basis.
3. Paragraph 6.2 (Database and Traveler) of LAT-PS-01584 is not
acceptable.
Unless progress has been
made, this database is not up and running.
Also, the database is not the traveler.
The traveler contains the required detailed information to manufacturer
trays. The database is a "summary
report" of tray manufacturing. The
traveler, drawings, assembly procedure, inspection test reports comprise the
documentation that will be reviewed and accepted by Quality Assurance.
4. The face sheet layup drawing LAT-DS-00049 needs to include note
specifying face sheet layup per Tray Panel Assembly Procedure LAT-PS-01584
(this procedure references Plyform's internal processes for face sheet
layup). The current drawing does not
reference any controlling documents or processes for face sheet layup. This is probably the case for the other face
sheet drawings also (LAT-DS-00596, -00617, -00618).
Also, to maintain
consistency with recent redlines by J. Clinton to LAT-PS-01584, the note on the
face sheet drawings needs to be changed to "...perform non destructive
evaluation per LAT-PS-01584".
The ESPI Procedure has not
been sent out for review or approval (it's not clear if there is an ESPI
procedure has been developed). The ESPI
is a "Special Process" and additional controls will be required for
this activity (technician training, standard calibration, etc.)
5. There is no reference to a painting procedure on the closeout
wall drawings LAT-DS-00139 and -00140, or the regular tray assembly drawing
LAT-DS-00148. Painting is not included
in the process flow chart (Figure 2) of the Tray Panel Assembly Procedure. Having a drawing note that says "Paint
and prime per manufacturers instructions" is not sufficient for the
painting process. The painting process
needs to be included in the assembly flow diagram (with reference to the
internal painting processes) in the Assembly Procedure -01584, then the notes
on the drawings can be changed to state "Prepare, clean and mask indicated
surfaces, prime and paint per LAT-PS-01584".
The insert bonding process
and installation tools are specified in the Assembly Procedure -01584, but we
need to make it clear in the drawing notes on the closeout wall assembly
drawings -00139 and -00140 that inserts are to be bonded into the closeout wall
prior to painting.
6. It appears three is not a documented process in place for
grounding tube bonding. The bonding
process to attach the grounding tubes, including any tools and fixtures, needs to be identified and specified in the
Assembly Procedure -01584, and the note for grounding tube bonding on the
closeout wall drawings -00139 and -00140 need to specify -01584.
7. Coupons will be fabricated with each lot of bonded inserts,
bonded face sheet/honeycomb assemblies, and final assembled trays per Assembly
Procedure -01584. Coupons are fabricated
per ASTM 100299 - is this correct? Also
there is no indication that the samples will be tested for lot
verification. Will these coupons, or
some other coupons, be tested as part of lot acceptance?
8. No cleaning specifications are identified on drawings or in the
Assembly Procedure for the tray assembly.
Are there any cleaning processes?
When and how will parts be cleaned during tray assembly? Is there a vacuum bakeout planned for the
trays? This needs to be defined in the
Assembly Procedure and/or on the drawings.
A bakeout procedure has not
been developed, reviewed or approved.
There must be a bakeout procedure developed.
9. In section 9.4.6 of the
Assembly Procedure, "labeling" of parts is called out. The drawings call out bag and tag. If hardware requires identification, DO NOT
use labels on hardware; use epoxy ink or an approved engraving process. This needs to be specified in the Assembly
Procedure.
10. After Plyform has
completed their portion of tray fabrication work, INFN has additional
activities (acceptance, package, handling, and shipping, shake test, bakeout,
etc.) to complete the tray fabrication.
It is expected that INFN develop a traveler and procedures for their
portion of work and it be approved by the Tracker team.
11. It's not clear all Peer
Review RFAs related to Tracker tray's have been submitted and closed (reference
LAT Systems Engineering RFA Status Sheet).
12. A final acceptance of
the tray's needs to occur. The
documentation package required for this final acceptance is the following. This End Item Data Package needs to be
referenced in the Tray Assembly Procedure (The End Item Data Package is not the
INFN tray database).
DOCUMENTATION
The following documentation
shall be delivered with each production lot of Tracker trays submitted for
acceptance:
* Certificate of Compliance
* Inspection and Test Reports.
* Traceability records of parts and tray assemblies.
* Process travelers shall be available for review at Supplier
facilities.
* Non-conformance Reports shall be available for review at
Supplier facilities.
* Lot traceability and qualification records.
* MRB reports with disposition.
13. LAT QA has to assume the design solutions
for the aluminum honeycomb grounding and loose carbon particle issues have been
reviewed and approved by the appropriate review team. Confirmation is requested by QA that a design review has
occurred.