40 likes | 126 Views
sTGC production and QA/QC database: first thoughts. Daniel. Lessons from TGC experience. One should use standard and widely spread tools One should have one unique d/base for Stock management Production (the same one for all centers!) Quality Control Certification Installation.
E N D
Lessons from TGC experience • One should use standard and widely spread tools • One should have one unique d/base for • Stock management • Production (the same one for all centers!) • Quality Control • Certification • Installation
Why is sTGC different from TGC? • Part management is a real issue • For TGC, parts were produced at WIS only. As a result, the part management section of the database turned out to be useless • For sTGC, part production is spread over the labs: shipment, QA, etc… needs serious tracking • Canadian colleagues need detailed statements for their Tax Authority. • However, not the tool for finances… • QC can influence production in a tricky way • For TGC, only accept/reject • sTGC is more subtle; example : thickness pairing • We can’t afford different systems across labs • Compatibility sTGC-MM is desirable
Technology • To be decided by experts. • New great tools on the (free) market • See David’s slides • However, do non-experts agree on the following ? • Data base running at CERN only • Human interface thru the WEB • Automated reports, etc… run at CERN. • No local copy, i.e. we rely on today’s network speed and reliability • Speed more than OK for human interface • >1 hour network disruptions are very infrequent. When one occurs, stop manual input to the data-base and resume when the network resumes • Some level of access authorization hierarchy (i.e. Weizmann regular people can’t enter data on behalf of Santiago, etc…)