U.S. ATLAS HL-LHC Upgrade Level 2 and Deputies-NSF only Management Mailing List

[Hal Evans <hgevans AT indiana.edu>]

Dear NSF L2Ms and DL2Ms,

As one of the recommendations from the NSF FDR we were asked to prepare Requirements Verification Matrices for our QA/QC work. The information to construct these RVMs is already available in the QA/QC documents for the individual deliverables (WBS L3 items) and in the US ATLAS Specifications Document (docdb #216, user-review, pwd=p2-lhc). Since the RVM is a summary of existing information, we'd like to keep it compact and not too difficult for the L3 managers to construct.

I'm attaching an example of what we have in mind here, based on the LAr FE electronics - WBS 6.4.1. Explanations of the individual fields are appended below.

Could you forward this to your L3 managers and ask them to start working on an RVM for their system? It would be good to have first drafts of these available by the end of February. I will be away from Feb.10-27, but Gustaaf can answer any questions you might have on this (sorry Gustaaf!).

Thanks  -  Hal

RVM Entry Explanations

      One spreadsheet per L3 system

• Post in same docdb entry as QA/QC document

      Requirement No.

• Each requirement from the specs spreadsheet gets a separate number, referenced at WBS L4: e.g. R-6.4.1.1-001

      Requirement

• Extract individual requirements from specs spreadsheet (docdb-216) text - one requirement per row
• First requirement should be a brief description of the deliverable
• Need to ensure synchronization with US ATLAS Specs spreadsheet

      Specifications Document

• Link to ATLAS Specifications (or other) document in which this requirement is stated - specify where the requirement is stated (section, table, etc.)

      Verification Method. Possible options are

• Test: this is the normal verification method to be done at the QA or QC step
• Review: use this for the architectural requirements (like the deliverable description)

      Where Verified

• where will the requirement be verified: institute test stand, CERN test facility,...

      Responsible Institute(s)

• list all institutes testing this requirement

      Quality Assurance

• Documented: QA results will usually be documented in the FDR
• Sign-Off: usually this will be the FDR committee report

      Quality Control

• Documented: indicate where the results of QC testing will be stored, i.e. a link to a database, a document, etc. "---" if not a QC requirement
• Sign-Off: this represents where the QC criteria are approved. Normally it will be the PRR committee report

      Comments

• Anything of relevance not covered in the other entries

-- 
^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v
 Hal Evans                        hgevans AT indiana.edu
           http://pages.iu.edu/~hgevans/
 Tel: (812)856-3828                Fax: (812)855-5533
 253 Swain Hall West               Indiana University
 727 E. Third St.               Bloomington, IN 47405
v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^v^

Attachment: RVM_6.4.1_v02.xlsx
Description: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet