Tom Jenkins
Lifetime Supporting Member
"Now one that really confused me is that all the above three (inspection & test plan, FAT, SAT ) were all the same. "
Well, sort of. There is nothing wrong with having one set of documents that defines the testing and check-ff for each machine function. The FAT can reference tht document, and specify what the source of the inputs and timing of the test and so on are. The SAT can reference the same document, identify the customer reuiremetns to provide inputs to the test, and acceptable criteria, and so on. Or you can cut and paste the same block into each of the two documents.
Inspectin, to me, should involve more physical aspects of the system - verification of form and fit as well as function. Is the proper guage of wire used, are the correct quantity of spare terminal blocks installed, are labels affixed properly, are relays of the proper rating used, etc.
Well, sort of. There is nothing wrong with having one set of documents that defines the testing and check-ff for each machine function. The FAT can reference tht document, and specify what the source of the inputs and timing of the test and so on are. The SAT can reference the same document, identify the customer reuiremetns to provide inputs to the test, and acceptable criteria, and so on. Or you can cut and paste the same block into each of the two documents.
Inspectin, to me, should involve more physical aspects of the system - verification of form and fit as well as function. Is the proper guage of wire used, are the correct quantity of spare terminal blocks installed, are labels affixed properly, are relays of the proper rating used, etc.
