COMMENTS ON 'SPECIFICATION OF A CHIP PRINTER' 7 JULY 1965 AND AMENDMENT 1, 15 OCTOBER 1965

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: NGA Records (Formerly NIMA)
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP78B04747A000400030050-0
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 28, 2016
• Document Release Date: February 16, 2001
• Sequence Number: 50
• Content Type: MEMO

Approved For ReIasw2OO1/03/06 : CIA-RDP78BO47.44 OOO4OO0
STATINTL
MEMORANDUM STATINTL
TO:
FROM
SUBJECT: Comments on "Specification of a Chip Printer"
7 July 1965 and Amendment 1, 15 October 1965
Comments on the spec of 7 July 1965 which appears to be the
basic equipment requirement are as follows:
1.1 Description - Nothing mentioned about installation considerations
like size, weight, etc. Who prepares installation sight? Who does
installation? What defines when you take possession from vendor?
2.6.2 Output Rate - Does this paragraph mean that the sequential
P/ j)5 /y
exposure rate (target to target) is to be 6/minute and the repetition
~
d 04"111
~ r1,1 '' rate 10/minute? If so, by stating the latter in terms of a design
arcri!
',t7:/ e K,objective rather than a requirement a loophole is provided. If
the interpretation of the 6/minute is correct, isn't the limitation
really in the speed of film transport, average distance between
targets, and the skill of the operator? On what requirements are
these output rates based?
2.7 Transport System
2.7.3 Specifies X mensuration accuracy of 0.012 inch (0.3 mm)
10 sls've~e 25 inches of travel. 2.7.4 Specifies positioning in Y
w,'rl- direction to 0.1 mm. Isn't it positioning accuracy in both
4rcr0r+e^5 d'~ /tlJ0 cases? Does this accuracy achieve anything? Unless this
alr,# ah1cA/roel 's/f"f /f spec was based on an analysis of the error this tolerance
f~trslller Se/tt7+0'",
11u1 jt,,s.,s introduces in mensurement, it isn't much better than a guess.
,[~ If overstated, you are paying handsomely for something not 604X,4
Jeo 5 tow IF, ?utd1~~'~ '"eel fql needed.
over Sit`/rn1
Specifies an adjustable X and Y mensuration system
accurate to + 1/2 mm over 25 inches. How does this differ
/Va
7i"6'
from 2.7.3 and 2.7.4 above? What does it mean?
' 2.9.3, 2.9.4,
and 2.9.5 Resolution. 6V -2 is not 12%. Why not
~'rs, dust state the required resolution based on knowledge of the
+/i
46041 `y dfilm, negative, etc. and leave out the buzz words?
ASV ' f 1 K
Approved For Release 2001/03/06 : CIA-RDP78BO4747AO00400030050-0
 Approved For Re4eaw 2001/03/06 : CIA-RDP78B04,744000400030050-0
~1 #t lo'i' c 2.16 Reliability - What is meant by 90% duty cycle? If it
i'll'-u ,~ d'mea s 90% up time, how is this to be demonstrated in a test? What
js a e ?a~ f on titutes "satisfactory and proper operation" for 10 hours?
1 ~vlouldn't it be better to specify reliability in conventional
J
it -~~ terms of mean-time-between failures, the MIL specs and test for
which are well established?
2.17 Service Life - How many years of operation are equivalent to
5000 hours? What constitutes degradation of performance? What
is normal mortality? Is the service life reasonable with respect
to cost? At 8 hours operation per day and 5 days/week, 5000 hours
is 2 1/2 years. The cost per year of this equipment would appear
to be quite high.
3.4 Acceptance Test - If the amount of operational use is unknown,
1 ss1jouldn't the acceptance period be specified in terms of operational
hours? Some of the complex equLp1ut11 a1~uliu 11_ ____ _
used 10 hours in 30 days. What is a 30 day normal operational
period under production conditions?
7. Manuals, is very sketchy. There is no mention of operational
tests and check out to determine when maintenance is required?
In no case yet have any of your vendors volunteered this to my
knowledge. If it is intended that the contractor produce a useful
operational and maintenance manual, at least the following need be
specified:
1. Description of equipment and operating components.
2. Directions for operating equipment.
a. Pre-checks
b. Turning on
c. Adjusting
d. Routine operation
e. Indications of trouble
f. Shutting down
Approved For Release 2001/03/06 : dIA-RDP78B04747A000400030050-0
 Approved For Re. ee 2001/03/06 : CIA-RDP78B6474A000400030050-0
Maintenance manual should include at least:
1.
Operations manual
2.
Detailed component descriptions
a.
b.
Detailed parts list
Detailed spare parts list
3.
Detailed maintenance procedures
a.
b.
c.
Maintenance schedule
Operational tests and schedule
Trouble shooting procedures
4.
Schematics and diagrams
9. Changes of Scope
,tA~e 9 17 Specifies 99 copies of a print. Is there any conceivable
,,A tt"` /7 h, deed for this number? The chip cassette only holds 36 anyway.
:t~ f5 ~a~,rr~srh+
=a~.. sr 6t JApparently the specification is really for a counter and has
90 1?A7X)/" nothing to do with the number of chips which can be produced.
The following comments apply to Amendment 1 of 15 October 1965
which is apparently intended to set forth the vendors obligation
for testing the instrument to demonstrate adherence to specs.
There are serious shortcomings in these specs which should be
altered if it is really evident that
rr' ;ail
revs
and
3.
the
the
complexity is needed.
Test Conditions - These appear
an instrument of this cost
to prescribe the conditions in
any relation to those
vendor's test area. Do they bear
equipment is to operate? If they don't the test is meaningless.
4.3.3 Resolution - It is
refers to the film maker.
in 2.9.3 of 7 July spec.
assumed that the manufacturer's resolution
6// 2 is not 12%. It is stated as 6/2
Is it supposed to be 1/61T ?
Positioning Accuracy - If as discussed above, the specified
accuracy is needed, the test described will not necessarily
be proven to be entirely linear. Otherwise, error such as that
resulting from backlash could still occur in the first fraction
of an inch and remain relatively constant thereafter. A better
specification would be % error per unit travel.
demonstrate it. A single test is not enough unless the
Approved For Release 2001/03/06 : CIA-RDP78B04747A000400030050-0
 Approved For Rs&ea a 2001/03/06 : CIA-RDP78BU+747A000400030050-0
da 1
What is used to measure "the exact dimensions given between
the two cross hairs"? What is used to "check the resultant accuracy
on the output film"? These measures are subject to error also.
Functional Tests - There seem to be some tests missing!
Neither 2.7.9 (whatever it is) nor 2.6.2 Print Rate are to be
tested. Nothing is mentioned in the specs or tests about transport
speed or loading time (roll film and cassetes).
5. Reliability - Keeping a log of Q.C. testing is nice but does
nothing to demonstrate reliability. Meeting a Q.C. requirement
may have nothing to do with reliability. Print quality and
illumination level, for example don't. In short, there is nothing
stated which will demonstrate any reliability let alone 5000 hours
without degradation of performance. It could fail every five
minutes and you would have no recourse.
Remarks
1. These specifications reflect insufficient effort in defining
the problem and developing the concept of the solution. The
requirements for speed of operation, print capacity, and positioning
accuracy are not supported by any quantitative information. Before
buying an item this expensive, a rigorous study should be made not
only to derive performance characteristics but to evolve the
operational concept. Piecemeal development of chip equipment is
not likely to improve the efficiency of the exploitation system.
2. There is no real reliability specification and no plan to
demonstrate any reliability, good or bad. There is a large risk
that this equipment will not perform dependably. There is ample
evidence from past developments that operating personnel quickly
lose interest in trying to use any equipment not reliable.
STATINTL
Approved For Release 2001/03/06 : &IA-RDP78B04747A000400030050-0