Punch items for LTMS Version 2 Surveillance Panel Consideration

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Unido.org/statistics International workshop on industrial statistics 8 – 10 July, Beijing Non response in industrial surveys Shyam Upadhyaya.
Advertisements

Nate-er Raider’s Vote For Nate-er Not Later. What this Party Stands For: Find New Places To Drill 0il Reform The Welfare State Maintain The Proper # 0f.
Consensus Questions.  The Education Study scope is broad and includes the following areas under the role of the federal government in public education.
IIIG LTMS V2 Review. LTMS V2 Review Data Summary: – Includes 285 Chartable reference oil results from all test laboratories – Most recent chartable reference.
Equitable IPv4 Run-Out Shepherds: David Farmer & Leo Bicknell.
LTMS TF SS May 11,  235 data entries ◦ 160 chartable tests  Five test laboratories (A, B, D, F, G) ◦ 35 test stands  2 stands only had one ref.
Vision of an exhibition at the Science Museum Large Hadron Collider Engineering wonder of the world Graham Farmelo30 June 2011.
© 2009 Chevron Oronite Companies. All rights reserved. Cummins ISM Reference Data Review for Cummins Surveillance Panel August 26, 2009 Jim Rutherford.
Formulae For each severity adjustment entity, X i = i th test result in original units in end-of-test order T i = i th test result in appropriate units.
1 The Second Addition of LTMS (Theoretical Sneak Peak for the VG) VG SP: May 2010.
Discussion Questions November 13, 2012 POSTECH Strategic Management of Information and Technology Laboratory (POSMIT: Dept.
Lubricant Test Monitoring System (LTMS) Quick Deck Draft 3 March 2, 2012.
Creating and Calling Procedures Alice 3 Beta. A few choices to be made Right window, upper left hand corner start by clicking on Class “MyScene” button.
-1- UNRESTRICTED / ILLIMITÉ Demonstrating the Safety of Long-Term Waste Management Facilities Dave Garrick 2015 September.
Management Considerations Sharon Chisholm
JACTest Monitoring Center Test Monitoring Center Report to the Mack Test Surveillance Panel June 17, 2002 Montreal.
ISM Test Development Task Force Report June 21, 2004.
LTMS Task Force Statistics Subgroup Report to Joint LTMS Open Forum San Antonio, TX May 11, 2010.
Enhancements to IIIG LTMS By: Todd Dvorak
JACTest Monitoring Center T-10 PB Ad Hoc Task Force Report to the Mack Test Surveillance Panel September 10, 2004 Richmond, VA.
ASTM TECHNICAL GUIDANCE COMMITTEE Semi-Annual Report Presented by William A. Buscher III Updated March 6, 2016.
Kevin Stevenson AST 4762/5765. What is MCMC?  Random sampling algorithm  Estimates model parameters and their uncertainty  Only samples regions of.
FHA Tax Credit Equity Pay-In Requirements for All Low Income Housing Tax Credit Projects Introduction to The New Tax Credit Wheelbarrow Module Validating.
RIPE Network Coordination Centre October Andrew de la Haye 32-bit ASN Adjustment to Global Policy Proposal Stacy Hughes Andrew.
LTMS Task Force Statistics Subgroup Report to Joint LTMS Open Forum San Antonio, TX May 11, 2010.
Proposed C13 MERIT SYSTEM Steve Jetter/Abdul Cassim
Test Monitoring Center Report to the Mack Test Surveillance Panel
LTMS Version 2 Sequence VID Example
Teaching the concept of
Technical Guidance Committee Report
Administration of a FIDIC Contract - Project Control
Formulae For each severity adjustment entity,
PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND CONTROL
Track 2 Working Group 4th Meeting
Quality by design (Qbd)
Creating the perfect text…
Cummins ISB LTMS2 This package contains charts and figures that supplement the LTMS2 template put forth by Statistics Task Group. LTMS2 Template document.
Prepared by Rand E Winters, Jr. ASR Senior Auditor October 2014
Cummins ISM Reference Data Review Merit Addendum for Cummins Surveillance Panel August 26, 2009 Jim Rutherford.
Test Monitoring Center Report to the Mack Test Surveillance Panel
Best Place to work with UAE
Freddie L. Johnson, JD, MPA
LTMS Task Force Statistics Subgroup Report to Joint LTMS Open Forum
Caterpillar C13 Test Matrix Update
Test Monitoring Center Report to the Mack Test Surveillance Panel
Hierarchy of Controls More than PPE.
Markov chain monte carlo
Specification Limits, Tolerances
Requirements Reference: Software Engineering, by Ian Sommerville, 6th edition, Chapters 5, 6, & 8.
Item 5.3 Feasibility studies
Scottish Improvement Skills
Proposed ISQC 1 (Revised)
Role and Responsibility for Quality Assurance Vishnu P. Shrestha
TSC Modifications Panel Meeting
Default UORA Parameters
Project Nexus Workgroup
Project Nexus Workgroup
INTERNATIONAL FUEL TAX AGREEMENT (IFTA)
Proposed actions for gtr development
4.13 Explain characteristics of effective data-collection instruments.
Analyzing Data Using Access
Create this Chart in your Warm-Up Section
Time series.
TGn Meeting Report - June 02 ‘09
ESTP course on 'Advanced issues in International Trade in Goods Statistics' 2-4 April 2014 QUALITY HANDBOOK.
Role and Responsibility for Quality Assurance Vishnu P. Shrestha
IWG Worn tyres Tyre Industry work status July 17th 2019
IWG Worn tyres Tyre Industry work status July 17th 2019
IWG Worn tyres Tyre Industry work status July 17th 2019
Presentation transcript:

Punch items for LTMS Version 2 Surveillance Panel Consideration Review default proposal, Section F, G, Appendix F, section 1 Lab, stand, engine? Reference entity Lab Zi level 2 limits for each Zi pass / fail criterion, lab and industry Determine if each pass / fail criterion is ei, Zi, or both

Hot Issues for Discussion Chance of extending and reducing reference interval should be equal or just drop level 2 versus your test is only as good as your worst (primary) parameter. Are we allowing people to not move toward target? Should we just use the Sequence III type LTMS for everything? K values => limits Reference intervals and spacing Replacement for the term “undue influence” Application in the presence of merits 5/11/2010

Hot Issues for Discussion SP determination of a lab too far – can it change? C13 example? Racing fastest in HD Critical/Noncritical versus Primary/Secondary Incentive for being on target Continuous adjustment Plug in for test types Do it in the middle of GF-5? Industry charting 5/11/2010

Reference Intervals and Spacing Earlier draft: In order to remain qualified for non-reference testing, a test stand shall begin a reference oil test after no more than 10 test starts in the stand or no later than 18 months following the completion of the stand’s previous qualifying reference oil test, whichever comes first. In order to avoid clustering at the end of the 18 month period, a test stand will begin a reference oil test after no more than 5 test starts commencing after 9 months following the stand’s previous qualifying reference oil test. The time limits could be modified if appropriate by the Surveillance Panel. These intervals might be reduced or increased as a function of monitoring. Current draft: In order to remain qualified for non-reference testing, a test stand shall begin a reference oil test after no more than 18 non-reference test starts in the stand or no later than 15 months following the completion of the stand’s previous qualifying reference oil test, whichever comes first. If more than 15 non-reference test starts or more than 12 months are allowed, then the laboratory is required to run 1 acceptable reference per six month interval. The time limits could be decreased if appropriate by the Surveillance Panel. These intervals might be reduced or increased as a function of monitoring. 5/11/2010