33K6-4-491-1

MIRCS · 08-04-2004 -- 11:51:07

4.3.13 This step overspecs the Vacuum module for the 2456-800A It's accuracy is +/- 10% Rdg or +/-10mTorr whichever is greater.

Change step 4.3.13 to read as follows: On a Limited Certification Label annotate the serial number of the TI Sensor, the TI Channel that it was calibrated on and state the accuracy as +/- 10% of charted value or +/- 2 microns(10mTorr for the 2456-800A) from the charted value, whichever is greater.

Phys_dim · 08-11-2004 -- 12:25:20

Well sounds like there should be an AFTO 22 submitted for the AVC(W)DV6R. Currently there are 74 items listed in T.O. 33K6-4-491-1, and if there is a problem with the T.O. it needs to be fixed.

as per 00-20-14

3.1.8 Documenting and Reporting Procedure Problems. PMEL technicians experiencing difficulty performing calibration procedures shall contact the appropriate AFMETCAL Det 1 branch for assistance or submit an AFTO Form 22 as necessary. Recommendations for minor changes may be emailed to the address listed on the TO Support Home Page of METWEB. When a calibration procedure (33K) contains an error and an AFTO Form 22 is
submitted, the technician shall select an alternate procedure for the affected parameter(s) in compliance with paragraph 3.1.2, and document the calibration authority for the affected parameter(s) in the Special block of the certification label.

MIRCS · 08-11-2004 -- 13:19:04

What i posted was actually Block 19 and 20 on the AFTO22. I just found out it has still not left here yet. It should be arriving very shortly.

MIRCS · 08-11-2004 -- 14:06:29

Belay my last......K6-491 has a AFMETCAL Ref# of 04-07-23232, so it has been sent and was in July. Don't understand why it doesn't show up in the recent 22 log.

Phys_dim · 08-12-2004 -- 07:39:56

Not sure why the AFTO info isn't there.... But I do know when you have a T.O. with multiple items; you end up with a lot of little.... "quirks", for lack of a better word. All the same, when you find a problem with a T.O., please do not hesitate in sending an AFTO 22. When we write a T.O. (especially with re-writes and revisions) we do not necessarily have all the data on the older items, and yes we do make mistakes.... unbelievable but true! hahaha! So be kind, but truthful.

"Trust is nice, proof is better" -Dr. Phillip Taylor

MIRCS · 08-12-2004 -- 23:03:33

I posted these 22's for others to see and heed them If needed not to duplicate them.

deerhunter · 08-20-2004 -- 12:00:42

It would probably be helpful if you are going to post AFTO 22 information such as you have, to also post the alternate procedure utilized for the affected parameter to be documented in the special block of the certification label. See T.O 00-20-14 para. 3.1.8.

MIRCS · 08-20-2004 -- 16:09:46

The alternate procedure information I thought was obvious......It was commercial data. This data may be found at www.ruska.com which I believe is in the weblinks part of this site under manufacturers. just look for the data sheet on the 2456A, and in the specifications it shows the accuracy of the AVC(W)DV6R.

There is nothing wrong with the method, only something wrong with the annotation in the special block.

Hope this helps you deerhunter.

deerhunter · 08-23-2004 -- 05:53:10

Didn't need any help with it MIRCS, just simply a general suggestion.