J
Joerg
- Jan 1, 1970
- 0
krw said:[...]krw wrote:
It needs to also be under ECO control. The first thing you need is a
standard operating procedure (SOP) on how to create a "service level"
new explanatory schematic. This SOP must include instructions to enter
it into the ECO process. Now the schematic for the version without relay
number 17 is created for the units that only get sold in Africa. Another
for the Siberian unit is created where the panel defroster circuitry is
populated. And so on.
I see no way of making sure this new schematic is accurate. If it's
not accurate (and reflects current reality) I propose that its worth
is less than zero. Someone might actually use it! ;-) ...as has
been done with our "assembly drawing" (same issues, really).
That's what the ECO process is for. The schematic needs to be thoroughly
checked before the ECO is signed off on. After that it shall remain
impossible to change unless a new ECO or at least a deviation case is
opened.
Where to put it isn't the problem. How to assure that it reflects
reality is the issue.
That's why I (even as a division head) sometimes spent hours on an ECO.
On occasion the president didn't quite understand why I spent so much
time in front of the computer. I told him that if there's a bug in
certain ECOs it could bring the whole place to a grinding halt. "Oh, we
certainly don't want that to happen, go on then".
Understood, except for the football[*] A SKU is a board made from Chinese menu of configurations all
wired on the board and represented in the schematic. These
"configurations" are things like relays/no-relay, channels 3&4
(deleted for two channel SKU), Channel 2 (deleted for one channel
SKU), Channel 1 (deleted if no wired channels), football,...
What's wrong with football? ;-)
Sports is usually boring ...
<ducking and running>