Final design review

Final Design Review - to establish that the design fulfills the requirements of its development specification before preparation for its production... 

Prepare and conduct a final design review with cooperative team and sponsors... 

The detail design phase will include the preparation of detail drawings and product specifications. A bill of materials must be prepared along with a detailed cost estimate. A final design review is conducted before releasing all drawings to be manufactured. 

Final design review (FDR) the goal of the review is to convince the executives in charge that the design is mature enough to be released into service. All safety objectives should be accomplished and continued airworthiness activities published. 

Final Design Review Technical Audits Configuration Management... 

The O SHA shall be generated to support the Project Milestone Final Design Review (FDR), to be discussed in Chapter 5. 

Final Design Review The FDR is conducted near the end of the Development stage (see Figure 2.1) when the approval is granted to enter the Production stage. At this point, system hazards have been identified and either eliminated or reduced to an acceptable level, or a roadmap to track resolution of open hazards has been distributed. 

After designing an approximate unit area requirement, it is important to review the final design performance details with a qualified exchanger manufacturer. See Table 10-42. 

Agenda 6 The last agenda consists of a team review and approval of a write-up that documents the final test design The documentation must Include the consensus factorial table, hierarchical tree, and mathematical model used to fit the predicted values In addition, the documentation must Include all basic arguments and considerations, even if these considerations do not appear in explicit form in the final design The specific reasons for excluding certain test... 

Many correlations have been published for predicting the height of a transfer unit, and the mass-transfer coefficients several are reviewed in Volume 2, Chapter 12. The two methods given in this section have been found to be reliable for preliminary design work, and, in the absence of practical values, can be used for the final design with a suitable factor of safety. 

Figure 10-11 Final design of phosgene reactor after informal safety review.

Finally, a review of robustness testing of CE methods was made and the tests were critically discussed (Section IX). Some researchers use the OVAT procedure, which seems less appropriate for a number of reasons. Some use response surface designs, which also seems less preferable in this context. Another remarkable observation from the case smdies is that only in a minority the quantitative aspect of the method is considered in the responses smdied, even though that was the initial idea of proposing the robustness tests. 

This paper discusses the prospects for creating 3-D architectures for batteries. We next introduce calculations for the 3-D interdigitated array battery (Figure 2a). which will illustrate the design considerations under which the 3-D configuration leads to better performance than the conventional 2-D one. Other sections then discuss the prior art in small power, followed by the materials, synthetic, and fabrication approaches required to achieve 3-D designs. Finally, we review the present status of the systems most likely to demonstrate true 3-D battery operation. 

Perform design reviews. Verify if the risks that were previously identified were mitigated as part of the solution presented in the design Finalize the test planning Design the Part 11 technical controls Approve the technical design specification dehverable(s)... 

Allowing time in the early stages of design for critical reviews and evaluation of alternatives would involve studies such as an early hazard and operability (HAZOP) study, using flowsheets, before final design begins,4 Fault tree analysis, quantitative risk assessment (QRA), checklists, audits, and other review and checking techniques can also be very helpful. These techniques are extensively discussed in the technical literature and will not be discussed in detail here. 

A hazard assessment during the prestartup period should be a final check rather than an initial assessment. This review should include the status of recommended changes from previous hazard studies and any significant design changes made after the final design. If serious hazards are identified at this time, it is unlikely that they can be eliminated without significant cost or startup delay. 

B. Process health and safety review preconstruction written occupational health assessment of each worksite or process or situation, prepared prior to final design... 

If a final HAZOP review is to be performed on a design that is say only 75% complete, the review team will necessarily have a lot to say about the unfinished portion of the design. The scheduled review method should be consistent with the level of design that will be presented for review. 

The OQ consists of a series of tests based on LIMS FDS. When the pharmaceutical manufacturer is happy that the installation of LIMS has been satisfactorily completed, the project will move on to the stage where the functionality of the final system will be demonstrated. Operational Qualification (OQ) is the vehicle for providing documentary evidence of the demonstrated LIMS functionality for the independent parts of LIMS prior to full integration. There is again a need at the beginning of this phase to review any issues raised during the Design Review process and IQ. 

---