1 / 6

CRG Naming Convention Needs upgrading the naming conventions and enhancing the naming processes

CRG Naming Convention Needs upgrading the naming conventions and enhancing the naming processes. Naming Conventions Sub-committee Meeting n.1. S. Knoops QAC TE(-CRG) representative – GCO CRG. Intro.

brit
Download Presentation

CRG Naming Convention Needs upgrading the naming conventions and enhancing the naming processes

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CRG Naming Convention Needsupgrading the naming conventions and enhancing the naming processes Naming Conventions Sub-committee Meeting n.1 S. Knoops QAC TE(-CRG) representative – GCO CRG

  2. Intro needs gathering in matter of upgrading the naming conventions and enhancing the naming processes. To recall that the setting up of naming conventions is different from providing names to functional positions, to items or to physical assets. The latter processes are services provided by BE-CO and EN-MEF-DC; these services shall be performed in accordance to the naming conventions and defined processes. To proceed with these needs gathering exercise, participants to this first meeting are expected to prepare a few slides to raise the issues they are experiencing on the one hand, • and to list their needs on this matter on the other hand. Following the meeting, needs will be merged and assessed in term of implementation feasibility. • Outcome of an internal CRG working group with a representative BE-CO concerning naming: • INFOR EAM allows only 1 structure. As it is a maintenance DB, the structure is maintenance based – other structures such as «powered by» or «controlled by» would be integrated in Layout DB. • Layout DB can also help with the diagnostics of problems – corrective maintenance on an equipment that has these “powered by” and “controlled by” structures. This is a big help for the intervening technician and can decrease the downtime. • To automatically generate the program code for the control system of our cryogenic installations, one has to have all concerned functional positions declared in Layout DB; so far this is done for the LHC tunnel, for all other installations, it would be expected for medium term future. • All Cryogenic equipment is not treated in the same way for the moment: we would like to standardization – homogenization: • Tunnel Cryo Equipment is integrated in Layout. All other Cryo Equipment is NOT integrated in Layout – do we create different rules, depending where the equipment will be installed/used • . • The logbooks - used in the operation and support sections - “talk” ONLY to the Layout DB and only when a work order needs to be created, it is switching to INFOR EAM for the asset; this is also expected for medium term future.

  3. Issues • Different rules for different type of installations need very good documentation, as this leads to confusion. • Example, not long ago: HIE-ISOLDE (“for cryo equipment, follow LHC convention”) • Example: the HC convention which first stood for HC: MACHINE CODE • Example: Electrical cabinets, installed by EN-EL: LHC-PM-QA-204 – LHC-C-QA-0002 NAMING OF A LAYOUT COMPONENT A layout component of the collider is identified as follows: <machine prefix> • <equipment code> • <position/location> • <family/function> Racks 19” installed by EN/EL: Electrical cabinets not installed by EN/EL, but only cabled:

  4. Needs As QAC-representative: • IF POSSIBLE, the same rules for all our equipment IF NOT POSSIBLE, a well defined CERN wide procedure • Whenever a rules exists, this should be documented (ex. Existing infrastructure naming that will not change to follow the new rules) Example: electrical cabinets, installed by EN-EL As GCO: I had to create the EDMS document 1219702: “Cryogenic facilities and equipment naming convention used in CMMS and other databases”, as to collect all rules that exists for the naming of our equipment depending on the installations and periods when it was manufactured. For this I need “released” documents to refer to: • The tasks of the respective naming services - BE-CO and EN-MEF-DC – should be well defined and clear to everybody and if possible this should be documented on the website Naming DB. • ALL naming procedures should be documented and «old» documents reviewed or put obsolete. • Decisions taken during the different working meetings MMP should be documented too (ex. Naming rules for parts-items)

  5. Annexes EDMS document 1375859

  6. Rules: Examples: Racks 19” installed by EN/EL: • The orange blocs are mandatory – the blue blocs are optional • The sequencenumber has a minimum of 2 and maximum of 3 digits. The sequencestartswith 1 and isincremented by 1. Electrical cabinets not installed by EN/EL, but only cabled:

More Related