[Exports_project_office] NASA EXPORTS Cruises (Instrumentation/Calibration Question from Nov Planning Meeting)

Wed Jan 6 06:13:48 PST 2021

Good morning to all,

I followed Ken down the rabbit hole. I agree that the document that he mentioned and sections 38 and higher are the most relevant to us.

Ken's question - Are we asking each group to bring in someone to make a list of all non-personal equipment, and sign off (ideally with a title like "electrician") that they have inspected X, Y, Z, (with no single/specific protocol) and they are good to be used? and we carry this piece of paper with us to the UK?

I think the answer is yes.

[cid:image002.png at 01D6E40A.7A2884D0]

I made an excel sheet (as that is what I do these days) - attached. Do you think this or a version of this would suffice?

Ivona

From: Exports_project_office <exports_project_office-bounces at espo.nasa.gov> On Behalf Of Ken Buesseler via Exports_project_office
Sent: Tuesday, January 5, 2021 2:55 PM
To: Graff, Jason Robert <Jason.Graff at oregonstate.edu>
Cc: exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: [Exports_project_office] NASA EXPORTS Cruises (Instrumentation/Calibration Question from Nov Planning Meeting)

Lets try to nail this electrical safety testing down and send to all.

>From the link I can find no specific check list.  Can someone find one?  I spent 30 minutes clicking on links and see no specific check list or protocol.  That would make it easier, as a research tech or scientist could conduct the test by my reading of this, once we nail down the exact testing protocol needed.

I did see this in the FAQ, which implies that a licensed electrician is not needed, but just "competent" person.

>From the web site.

"The person doing testing work needs to competent to do it. In many low-risk environments, a sensible (competent) member of staff can undertake visual inspections if they have enough knowledge and training. However, when undertaking combined inspection and testing, a greater level of knowledge and experience is needed, and the person will need:

  *   the right equipment to do the tests
  *   the ability to use this test equipment properly
  *   the ability to properly understand the test results"

Also from the web site FAQ, which implies new equipment does NOT need testing.

"New equipment should be supplied in a safe condition and not require a formal portable appliance inspection or test. However, a simple visual check is recommended to verify the item is not damaged."

OK, since I went down the rabbit hole, the attached has the most specific info, but WAY TOO MUCH for all 60+ participants.  This is the best/meat of what I could find (sections 38-50 are most relevant).

[cid:image003.png at 01D6E40A.7A2884D0]

I may be paranoid, but we almost got kicked off a UK ship in 2017 for not having original copies of the safety and medical training (w/ appropriate seals/stamps, etc).

In 2017, no one asked about this electrical certification.

Bottom line-

Are we asking each group to bring in someone to make a list of all non-personal equipment, and sign off (ideally with a title like "electrician") that they have inspected X, Y, Z, (with no single/specific protocol) and they are good to be used? and we carry this piece of paper with us to the UK?

Ken
On 1/5/2021 1:40 PM, Graff, Jason Robert wrote:
Hi Ken,

>From a recent conversation with Jon Short following the Cook discussion...

2. Electrical certifications:

Can we get a bit more detail on what needs certification?

For example, something as small as a vacuum pump? Or is it just large
instruments? Do over-the-side instruments need certification? What
paperwork is needed?

Essentially everything that is being supplied by an institute needs to be electrically safety checked - an FAQ for the UK Portable Appliance Testing can be found here. https://www.hse.gov.uk/electricity/faq-portable-appliance-testing.htm<https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.hse.gov.uk%2Felectricity%2Ffaq-portable-appliance-testing.htm&data=04%7C01%7Civona.cetinic%40nasa.gov%7C0e35bdcf6fc743d5267608d8b1b3e47a%7C7005d45845be48ae8140d43da96dd17b%7C0%7C0%7C637454733489519624%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=3TWdlaJbexhFqP4Ch8W%2Bn3uqDZkaTMO9gVh0PRydnr8%3D&reserved=0>
Personal equipment (laptops, hairdryers etc.) are not required to be tested.
In reality what is required is for everything to be checked over by an electrician and a record to be made. If this becomes a huge problem let me know and I will see what we can arrange from this end, although the COVID situation will likely make it awkward for us to get someone outside of the bubble to do any testing.

Jason

Jason Graff
Oregon State University
Assistant Professor - Senior Research
541-737-4090

On Jan 5, 2021, at 10:04 AM, Ken Buesseler via Exports_project_office <exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov<mailto:exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov>> wrote:

[This email originated from outside of OSU. Use caution with links and attachments.]
I have nothing to add on cals- good to do
I do have a bigger concern about this still unspecified "electrical certification".  We are closing up boxes, packing for 2 UK ships, and have items that are "home made" (motor/splitter) and off the shelf vacuum pumps, small ovens, PC's that run instruments, etc.  What is needed from the UK side to use these? If we have to schedule an electrician to "certify" in some manner, that will hold up packing.
Can we get more info before our Thu meeting at noon (and 1 pm cruise meeting).
thanks, Ken

On 1/4/2021 5:36 PM, Graff, Jason Robert via Exports_project_office wrote:
I, of course, do not hold the $$ so am fine with the fresh cals.  It could save a lot of headache and time compared to 2018 post-cruise efforts.

Jason Graff
Oregon State University
Assistant Professor - Senior Research
jrgraff at science.oregonstate.edu<mailto:jrgraff at science.oregonstate.edu>
541-737-4090

On Jan 4, 2021, at 2:26 PM, Craig M. Lee via Exports_project_office <exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov<mailto:exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov>> wrote:

[This email originated from outside of OSU. Use caution with links and attachments.]
Before I make the cal request to NOC, are we all OK with the aded cost? It's not extreme (roughly $10k), but it is an added cost.

Thanks,
Craig

--
-------------------------------------------------------
Craig M. Lee
University of Washington
Applied Physics Laboratory
1013 NE 40th St.
Seattle, WA 98105-6698
craiglee at uw.edu<mailto:craiglee at uw.edu>
(206) 685-7656
(206) 543-6785 (fax)
http://iop.apl.washington.edu<https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fiop.apl.washington.edu%2F&data=04%7C01%7Civona.cetinic%40nasa.gov%7C0e35bdcf6fc743d5267608d8b1b3e47a%7C7005d45845be48ae8140d43da96dd17b%7C0%7C0%7C637454733489529574%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=4YstDuGIn2H57I7zYLnTkat9FdGyJyp2Wnoj2EKAUOM%3D&reserved=0>
-------------------------------------------------------

On Dec 28, 2020, at 8:01 PM, Ivona Cetinic <icetinic at gmail.com<mailto:icetinic at gmail.com>> wrote:

I think you should suggest to him to proceed with your #1 (calibrate all). I see no other way of doing it.

Ivona

On Mon, Dec 28, 2020 at 10:41 PM Craig M. Lee via Exports_project_office <exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov<mailto:exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov>> wrote:
Andrew's email suggest that they think it's possible. I agree that the timeline seems very tight, so it may be that they have not yet done a thorough investigation of lead times.

--
-------------------------------------------------------
Craig M. Lee
University of Washington
Applied Physics Laboratory
1013 NE 40th St.
Seattle, WA 98105-6698
craiglee at uw.edu<mailto:craiglee at uw.edu>
(206) 685-7656
(206) 543-6785 (fax)
http://iop.apl.washington.edu<https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fiop.apl.washington.edu%2F&data=04%7C01%7Civona.cetinic%40nasa.gov%7C0e35bdcf6fc743d5267608d8b1b3e47a%7C7005d45845be48ae8140d43da96dd17b%7C0%7C0%7C637454733489529574%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=4YstDuGIn2H57I7zYLnTkat9FdGyJyp2Wnoj2EKAUOM%3D&reserved=0>
-------------------------------------------------------

On Dec 28, 2020, at 7:23 PM, Cetinic, Ivona (GSFC-616.0)[UNIVERSITIES SPACE RESEARCH ASSOCIATION] <ivona.cetinic at nasa.gov<mailto:ivona.cetinic at nasa.gov>> wrote:

Hello Craig,

Sorry for slow reply - I agree with you - we could use all fresh calibrations. However - is that possible in this point? I can put some pressure on Seabird to ensure the needed turnaround, but outside of that - my hands are tied.

Ivona

From: Exports_project_office <exports_project_office-bounces at espo.nasa.gov<mailto:exports_project_office-bounces at espo.nasa.gov>> On Behalf Of Craig M. Lee via Exports_project_office
Sent: Tuesday, December 22, 2020 11:56 AM
To: EXPORTS PO <exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov<mailto:exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov>>
Subject: [Exports_project_office] Fwd: NASA EXPORTS Cruises (Instrumentation/Calibration Question from Nov Planning Meeting)

Hi All,

Received this from Andrew Moore at NOC - specs for their light sensors and thoughts on calibrations.

Andrew supplies lists of sensors carried by the two ships. Note that this covers underway (met and flow-through) only, and does not include the CTD  sensor suites.

Looking at the summary for Cook, by the time we sail most of the cals will be a year old, with some pushing two years. All will be waiting the manufacturer's recommended calibration interval (the 'cal due date' on the sheet). They also carry spares (that I assume are also with their calibration intervals).

Andrew quotes ~ GBP 7,500 for doing fresh calibrations on the entire sensor set, and also offers the option of having fresh cals run on selected sensors, if we don't feel the need to do the entire suite. Some thoughts (in order of prefefence):
(1) Have everything freshly calibrated (as we are doing with our own sensors). This would be my first choice.
(2) Calibrate everything that will be over a year since last cal., but also include CM6 Pyrometer, PAR, C-Star and WETStar regardless of time since last cal.
(3) Calibrate everything that will be over a year since last cal.

I do not think it would be wise to begin our work with Discovery and Cook's sensor suites in whatever state they arrive in.

Best Regards,

Craig

--
-------------------------------------------------------
Craig M. Lee
University of Washington
Applied Physics Laboratory
1013 NE 40th St.
Seattle, WA 98105-6698
craiglee at uw.edu<mailto:craiglee at uw.edu>
(206) 685-7656
(206) 543-6785 (fax)
http://iop.apl.washington.edu<https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fiop.apl.washington.edu%2F&data=04%7C01%7Civona.cetinic%40nasa.gov%7C0e35bdcf6fc743d5267608d8b1b3e47a%7C7005d45845be48ae8140d43da96dd17b%7C0%7C0%7C637454733489539529%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=RIV4BFwUUkGNRHrKutOLI0UgpheVSaNu5eQxam0sqwA%3D&reserved=0>
-------------------------------------------------------

Begin forwarded message:

From: "Moore, Andrew S." <anmo at noc.ac.uk<mailto:anmo at noc.ac.uk>>
Subject: NASA EXPORTS Cruises (Instrumentation/Calibration Question from Nov Planning Meeting)
Date: December 22, 2020 at 2:39:55 AM PST
To: "Craig M. Lee" <craiglee at uw.edu<mailto:craiglee at uw.edu>>

Hello Craig,

I just wanted to respond to a couple of questions regarding underway sampling instrumentation that were raised at the NASA Exports cruise planning meeting held in November.

1) Detectable wavelengths of our light sensors:

  *   On each vessel we use two Kipp & Zonen CMP6 pyranometer instruments. Their specification for spectral range is 285-2800nm (https://www.kippzonen.com/Product/12/CMP6-Pyranometer<https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.kippzonen.com%2FProduct%2F12%2FCMP6-Pyranometer&data=04%7C01%7Civona.cetinic%40nasa.gov%7C0e35bdcf6fc743d5267608d8b1b3e47a%7C7005d45845be48ae8140d43da96dd17b%7C0%7C0%7C637454733489539529%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=6SEXqHAbixz70awBeiTtET5uKNVE%2FFj20dfQxHOAaOY%3D&reserved=0>)
  *   We also have two Photosynthetically Active Radiation sensors (PAR) on each vessel to be used in conjunction with the above pyranometer sensor for monitoring the ratio of PAR light in total solar radiation.
  *   These are mounted in port and starboard pairs on the met platform at the bow of each vessel
2) Calibration Intervals/New Calibrations

  *   We observe all the manufacturers advice on service and calibration intervals (mostly yearly, with the exception of the light sensors, thermosalinograph and transmissometer which are recommended for 2 yearly servicing/calibration periods). We also hold a suite of spare sensors onboard in case of a failure during an active cruise.
  *   I know the question of having new ('fresh') calibrations was raised and this is something we are happy to explore if you would like us to. I have looked at our capacity for doing so, and it is something we could achieve for most sensors if that was desired. I think you said you have encountered some rather neglected meteorological suites of instruments, so I wanted to reiterate that our intention is to always have the system maintained and operational, which is usually possibly as one of our team is generally onboard throughout the year.
  *   I have attached a full list of the calibrated underway sampling instruments that we use (I've included links to their manufacturers pages/specifications - but very happy to answer any specific questions you may have regarding any instrument).
  *   if there were particular priorities for fresh calibrations (or certainties on exclusions), then we can plan accordingly. We would then be able to include any additional calibration costs to the cruise costings.
  *   Just for transparency/reference: I have also included two examples of our current calibration plan (we maintain this active document online to allow planning etc.) - this is what I'll be using to plan any alternatives for fresh calibrations. Many of our sensors are swapped out during the summer vessel refit period, so we tend to see July/Aug/Sept for when our calibration periods require renewal.
  *   Subject to any above priorities/exclusions, I have also included a breakdown of costs for achieving these fresh calibrations. For a full 'fresh' set on both vessels this would amount to a total of approximately 7500GBP, although just to reiterate, this includes items such as two transmissometers, which to my understanding is more of a serviced item, than an issue of calibration.

     *   The only caveat to the 'full fresh set' approach is that at most we would only be able to freshly calibrate 3 of the 4 TIR sensors, as we don't have sufficient instruments to rotate whilst still maintaining coverage on the current cruise programme. Of course the forth instrument would still be within its standard recommended calibration interval.

  *   Calibrations are all conducted at either the manufacturers calibration facility or a facility endorsed by the manufacturer - if you have any concerns about the standards, or particular requests then please let me know and I'll try to help.
Apologies for the length of the email, but I hope the information is useful. Please let me know if you've any questions (about this, or anything else) and if you'd like us to pursue any aspect beyond what we would normally provide for calibrations. Because calibration times for some items could be 8 weeks or more, it would be appreciated if you could advise us of any requests by the end of January if possible please, then we would do our best to try to prepare for them to be included in the cruise.

Very best wishes, and Happy Holidays.

Andrew Moore

Seagoing Technician
National Oceanography Centre

This email and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the named recipients. If you are not the intended recipient you must not use, disclose, copy or distribute this email or any of its attachments and should notify the sender immediately and delete this email from your system.
The National Oceanography Centre (NOC) has taken every reasonable precaution to minimise risk of this email or any attachments containing viruses or malware but the recipient should carry out its own virus and malware checks before opening the attachments. NOC does not accept any liability for any losses or damages which the recipient may sustain due to presence of any viruses.
Opinions, conclusions or other information in this message and attachments that are not related directly to NOC business are solely those of the author and do not represent the views of NOC.

_______________________________________________
Exports_project_office mailing list
Exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov<mailto:Exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov>
https://espo.nasa.gov/lists/listinfo/exports_project_office

_______________________________________________
Exports_project_office mailing list
Exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov<mailto:Exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov>
https://espo.nasa.gov/lists/listinfo/exports_project_office

Jason Graff
Oregon State University
Assistant Professor - Senior Research
541-737-4090

_______________________________________________

Exports_project_office mailing list

Exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov<mailto:Exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov>

https://espo.nasa.gov/lists/listinfo/exports_project_office

--

Ken Buesseler

Senior Scientist, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

http://cafethorium.whoi.edu<https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcafethorium.whoi.edu%2F&data=04%7C01%7Civona.cetinic%40nasa.gov%7C0e35bdcf6fc743d5267608d8b1b3e47a%7C7005d45845be48ae8140d43da96dd17b%7C0%7C0%7C637454733489549490%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=5cVzmzFsVs%2BQ05cFSi80w2NZ4tibgJrhM2BCyJmFa7A%3D&reserved=0>     @Cafe_Thorium

Director, Center for Marine and Environmental Radioactivity

http://www.whoi.edu/CMER<https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whoi.edu%2FCMER&data=04%7C01%7Civona.cetinic%40nasa.gov%7C0e35bdcf6fc743d5267608d8b1b3e47a%7C7005d45845be48ae8140d43da96dd17b%7C0%7C0%7C637454733489549490%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=aS51U%2B8%2BlCeEUSV%2FH%2FlkQz%2FqhbuFtCZw2eA4Iqzs0T0%3D&reserved=0>        @whoi_cmer

508-289-2309
_______________________________________________
Exports_project_office mailing list
Exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov<mailto:Exports_project_office at espo.nasa.gov>
https://espo.nasa.gov/lists/listinfo/exports_project_office

--

Ken Buesseler

Senior Scientist, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution

http://cafethorium.whoi.edu<https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcafethorium.whoi.edu%2F&data=04%7C01%7Civona.cetinic%40nasa.gov%7C0e35bdcf6fc743d5267608d8b1b3e47a%7C7005d45845be48ae8140d43da96dd17b%7C0%7C0%7C637454733489559440%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=CTQKdFnkUbU1KbMXCcjVN3O8Zaxk0hBmyiDvWPftyB8%3D&reserved=0>     @Cafe_Thorium

Director, Center for Marine and Environmental Radioactivity

http://www.whoi.edu/CMER<https://gcc02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.whoi.edu%2FCMER&data=04%7C01%7Civona.cetinic%40nasa.gov%7C0e35bdcf6fc743d5267608d8b1b3e47a%7C7005d45845be48ae8140d43da96dd17b%7C0%7C0%7C637454733489559440%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C1000&sdata=%2FElYTVGcQSu%2Bm%2Fst3h1qV747IS3BtBzhmlCDMlqMIZU%3D&reserved=0>        @whoi_cmer

508-289-2309
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://espo.nasa.gov/pipermail/exports_project_office/attachments/20210106/3e9052bf/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image002.png
Type: image/png
Size: 70433 bytes
Desc: image002.png
URL: <http://espo.nasa.gov/pipermail/exports_project_office/attachments/20210106/3e9052bf/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.png
Type: image/png
Size: 70429 bytes
Desc: image003.png
URL: <http://espo.nasa.gov/pipermail/exports_project_office/attachments/20210106/3e9052bf/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Inspection record.xlsx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.spreadsheetml.sheet
Size: 13440 bytes
Desc: Inspection record.xlsx
URL: <http://espo.nasa.gov/pipermail/exports_project_office/attachments/20210106/3e9052bf/attachment-0001.xlsx>