Verifying check

This is somewhat similar to batch process, discussed in Clause 3.0 of Chapter VI. The model approach of ISA 106 is shown in Fig. XII/4.0.1 -1. Here each procedure and implementation has three basic execution steps command (trigger), perform (action), and verify (check for success/failure). 

Step 6. Verify. Check the final overall equation to ensure that it is balanced both for number of atoms and for electric charge. For example, show that in the balanced equation from step 5, the net charge on each side of the equation is -5. 

One way of verifying the exactness of a differential is to check the validity of expressions like that above. 

By substituting these expressions into Eq. (55), one can see after some algebra that ln,g(x, t) can be identified with lnx (t) + P t) shown in Section III.C.4. Moreover, In (f) = 0. It can be verified, numerically or algebraically, that the log-modulus and phase of In X-(t) obey the reciprocal relations (9) and (10). In more realistic cases (i.e., with several Gaussians), Eq. (56-58) do not hold. It still may be due that the analytical properties of the wavepacket remain valid and so do relations (9) and (10). If so, then these can be thought of as providing numerical checks on the accuracy of approximate wavepackets. 

Knowledge acquisition subsystem The task of the knowledge acquisition subsystems is to assemble and upgrade the knowledge base. A major task is to verify the data and check for consistency. 

Ah initio calculations of polymer properties are either simulations of oligomers or band-structure calculations. Properties often computed with ah initio methods are conformational energies, polarizability, hyperpolarizability, optical properties, dielectric properties, and charge distributions. Ah initio calculations are also used as a spot check to verify the accuracy of molecular mechanics methods for the polymer of interest. Such calculations are used to parameterize molecular mechanics force fields when existing methods are insulficient, which does not happen too often. 

Checks on the internal electronics, such as verifying that the voltage levels of internal power supplies are within specifications. 

Checks on environmental conditions within the instruments, such as verifying that the case temperature is within specifications. 

Controls to verify and/or cross check completion and accuracy of development and update of PSI. 

Match batch size to container size of critical components, using an integral number of whole containers, where possible Double check materials being added to reactor Complete batch loading sheets for each batch run Use of operator sign-off sheets Preweigh reactants before transferring to reactor Verify raw materials (certificate of analysis for critical materials)... 

Low pump head Increase pressure at source pressure., Verify pump design will achieve needed pressure Check for restrictions in suction and discharge lines CCPS G-23... 

Check area classification and verify that electrical equipment is properly rated... 

Proof Testing A run through the process substituting nonhazardous materials (e.g., water) to check for the adequacy of the equipment e.g., heating/cool-ing load, and to verify procedural steps. 

Candidate tollers should be made aware of special insurance needs the proposed toll will require as soon as possible in the initial qualification process. Clients should ask to see a toller s standard insurance certificate to verify coverage. It is common to check for ... 

Test run steps can frequently be incorporated into process startup procedures. Two examples would be pulling a vacuum on vessels and verifying it holds, or distilling a solvent and checking for the presence of water to verify the mechanical integrity of the heating and cooling equipment. 

The value of the first peak of the test wave is specified in Table 26.4. During the test there should be no rupture or fiashover at any part of the unit, which should be verified by a cathode ray oscillograph. An oscillograph should also be used to record the voltage and check the wave shtipe. 

The solution is Identify the dominant and weak pump should they exist. To do this, take pressure gauge readings with the pumps running at shut-off head. Verify that the impellers are the same diameter, and that the wear bands and motor speeds are equal. If you can identify one pump in the pair as dominant, ahvays start the weak pump first and then add the dominant pump in parallel with the weaker. The dominant pump coming on stream w ill push open the check valve. It may be necessary to override a sequential starter. 

After a sufficient polarization period, which for the well casing is about a year, for flow lines with a high protection current requirement about half a year, and for flow lines with good coating about a month, the cathodic protection for the flow lines can be verified as in Section 10.4. If the cathodic protection is set up as local cathodic protection, checking is only necessary after a year. 

First, the old standby methods of checking the overall individual component balances and checking dew and bubble points will help verify distillate and bottoms concentrations. The total overhead (distillate plus reflux) calculated dew point is compared to the column overhead observed temperature and the bottoms calculated bubble point is compared to the column bottom observed temperature. If the analyses are not felt to be grossly in eiTor. the following method wfill also prove very helpful. 

It is a good idea for the user to have a witness to check that someone has inspected and verified operation of all safety and warning instrumen-... 

For a typical assembly, first part qualification begins with a rigorous dimensional check and painstaking prefit of all details on the bond tool. The assembly details are placed on the tool without adhesive, close contact between bond surfaces is verified and any detail or tool interference is corrected prior to proceeding. This is followed by fabrication of a verification film , or a simulated bond cure cycle of the assembly to allow measurement of the adhesive bondline thickness. 

The recommendation is to start with Method A, if possible. If this is not possible Method C can be used, but it is recommended that the equations given in Method A, together with approximations of the contaminant s properties, be used to check and/or verify the manufacturer s data. Method B could be used if no other alternative exists. If the design is for a noncommercial or nonstandard exhaust, it is not possible to use Method C and it is strongly recommended to use Method A, even if only approximate values are available. 

The evaluation methods could be direct, e.g., measuring a containment index, or indirect, e.g., measuring pressure loss or velocity distribution. The direct methods are used to measure the performance of a hood or an inlet during periodic preventive maintenance. Indirect methods are used for verifying or checking on a daily basis (routine checks). How often each method is used depends on the availability of instrumentation and qualified personnel, since direct measurement of a hood s performance can be both expensive and difficult. On the other hand, indirect methods are usually easier to use and can sometimes include inexpensive, continuously monitoring instruments (pressure gauges or velocity indicators). 

The existing quality system requirements do have some of the above requirements but it is ISO/TS 16949 in which the full impact of their relationship is evident. It follows therefore that in making the transition from your existing system to an ISO/TS 16949 compliant system, the first step is to establish the extent to which your existing system possesses these linkages and feedback loops - a sort of coherence check to verify your system is not just a bolt-on extra. 

This would check the certification status of the quality system, verifying that any certification was properly accredited. For non-ISO 9000 registered subcontractors, a quality system assessment may be carried out at this stage either to ISO 9000 or the customer s standards. 

Prior to orders being placed the purchasing documents should be checked to verify that they are fit for their purpose. Again this requirement is appropriate to subcontracts but only if you submit your purchasing documents to your vendors. The extent to which you carry out this activity should be on the basis of risk and if you choose not to review and approve all purchasing documents, your procedures should provide the rationale for your decision. The standard does not require that the review and approval be documented. In some cases orders are produced using a computer and transmitted to the vendor directly without any evidence that the order has been reviewed or approved. The purchase order does not have to be the only purchasing document. If you enter pur-... 

This requirement poses something of a dilemma when purchasing subcontract labor because it cannot be treated the same as product. You still need to ensure, however, that the labor conforms with your requirements before use. Such checks will include verification that the personnel provided have the requisite qualifications, skills, and knowledge and they are who they say they are. These checks can be made on the documentary evidence provided, such as certificates, but you will probably wish to monitor their performance because it is the effort you have purchased, not the people. You will not be able to verify whether they are entirely suitable until you have evaluated their performance. Subcontract labor could be classified as product released prior to verification being performed and so you need to keep records of the personnel and their performance during the tenure of the contract. 

---