Question_and_Answers-1.pdf
PDF 114 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Lube Accessory Test Stand Federal contract opportunity
- Solicitation number
- FA8125-17-R-0007
About this file
Q&A Doc: Government's response to questions raised by contractors
View the file
Other files for this federal contract opportunity
Show all 27
On GovTribe
Work with this file on GovTribe
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
April 12, 2017 Questions & Answers: Lube Accessory Test Stand Purchase
FA8125-17-R-0007
GENERAL INFORMATION:
• Statement of Work sections 3.5.6, 3.5.7, and 4.7 have been revised. Please refer to attached document for the latest info.
• Appendix F-Correlation Test Plan has also revised to clarify that if a part number is not available for testing then an alternate part number for the NSN can be used. Please see attached document for the latest info.
• Two (2) additional UUT’s for factory testing have been added to meet the majority of different tests performed with the test stand which will bring the total GFP items to three (3).
QUESTION & ANSWERS:
1. Question:
Can the End Item T.O.s be provided so an accurate count of the required fixtures can be tabulated?
Answer:
Appendix H (Drawings), Appendix I (UUT Test Specifications), Appendix L (Operations & Maintenance Manual) & Appendix M (Copies of IPB T.O. 33D4-6-668-4) are available on request from the contracting officer upon receipt of the contractor’s DD From 2345 (Militarily Critical Technical Data Agreement).
Information regarding the DD Form 2345 and certification for contractors who wish to obtain access to unclassified technical data is available at https://www.dlis.dla.mil/jcp
2. Question:
Appendix B indicates that only two of the fourteen components will be provided by the government for factory acceptance. In the interest of reducing risk and troubleshooting after delivery of the test stand, can more components be sent for factory acceptance?
Answer:
Tinker AFB will provide 3 Components (F110 Fuel, Lube and Hydraulic Oil Cooler; F101 AFT Tank Assembly;
and F110 Oil Tank Assembly) for Factory Acceptance testing which will provide a large variation of testing.
3. Question:
For correlation, what stand is considered the “master stand” and have component OEMs verified the results that the “master stand” produces?
Answer:
The existing GE Lube Accessory Test Stand in the Tank & Cooler shop at Tinker AFB is the master test stand used for testing Engine Lube Accessory Components and will be used for correlation acceptance testing. The existing GE Lube Accessory test stand was modified in the past and at that time OEM Gold plate units were used for correlation acceptance testing.
https://www.dlis.dla.mil/jcp
4. Question:
It is understood that vendor commercial format manuals are expected. However, the SOW wording also suggests that format and content should be similar to the existing test stand T.O. and IPB. Can this apparent contradiction be clarified?
Answer:
Section 5.5 of the SOW explains what are the minimum expectations for the content of the Commercial Operation & Maintenance Manual and IPB. The IPB for example should have a Table of Contents, Record of Changes, Foreword, Maintenance Parts List, and Numerical Index. The reference to the Tech Order is to give suggested guidance for how that content should be formatted and typically what is expected for content for those sections.
5. Question:
SOW 3.1 states “construction and work area layout shall be based on design of the existing test stand…” Does this relate primarily to general layout of panel controls and their ID numbers/nomenclature?
Answer:
Yes, this relates to the general layout of the panel controls (Valves, switches, etc.) and ID’s/numbers/nomenclature for those items.
6. Question:
Related to question 5 above, is it expected that the same manufacturer/part number test stand parts that are used on the existing stand should be use on the new stand design, or can the vendor select parts they feel are most appropriate to meet the performance requirements?
Answer:
Yes the vendor can select COTS parts that they feel are more appropriate that meet or exceed the performance requirements.
7. Question:
For software, would it be acceptable to use the following parameter display color scheme? We have found that using white for “in limits” is easier for operators to read than green.
a. Red = Out of limits high
b. Yellow= Out of limits low
c. White = In limits
Green is the preferred standardized color to show “in limits”.
8. Question:
Can a facility floor plan for the new test stand location be provided?
Yes
9. Question:
SOW 3.5.7 allows for reverse engineering of fixtures to produce new ones. Can any fixtures be send to the vendor after contract award or must reverse engineering be done at Tinker AFB?
Fixtures are used to support existing workloads, therefore reverse engineering will need to be done at Tinker AFB.
10. Question:
Are there any fixtures that the government does not expect vendors to provide because an existing fixture will be used with the new test stand?
No, all fixtures required for testing will need to be provided by the vendors.
11. Question:
To what extent is the new test stand’s design to be based on the existing test stand? User interface only or internal design as well? Please elaborate.
Answer:
The general Layout of the panel controls (Valves, switches, ID’s, nomenclature, etc.) should be similar to the existing test stand, but the exact locations for a valve, switch is not critical as long as it is ergonomically functional for the Test Operator. The internal test stand design does not have to be exactly like the existing test stand, but pumps, motors, valves, flow meters, oil tanks, etc. should be accessible to perform routine maintenance and calibration.
12. Question:
Understanding there will only be 2 components supplied to the manufacturer before delivery (Appendix B); this will be a significant cost driver for on-site field service to perform correlation test/debug/buyoff the remaining 12 components. Is there any possibility to provide more components from the list in Appendix B?
Tinker AFB will provide 3 Components (F110 Fuel, Lube and Hydraulic Oil Cooler; F101 AFT Tank Assembly;
and F110 Oil Tank Assembly) for Factory Acceptance testing which will provide a large variation of testing.
13. Question:
Will any existing test fixtures be available as GFP?
Answer:
No, Fixtures are used to support existing workloads, therefore reverse engineering will need to be done at Tinker AFB to make fixtures.
14. Question:
Correlation Testing will prove that the new test stand meets or exceeds the existing test stand and applicable TO requirements. Please define “exceeds.”
The accuracy for new test gauges, flow meters, etc. shall meet or exceed the original equipment.
15. Question:
Manuals: SOW para 5.5.2 states that the manuals should follow existing manual formats/contents for ease of use. Does this mean the commercial manual should be formatted like the existing TO or is the standard commercial manual format acceptable?
Answer:
Section 5.5 of the SOW explains what are the minimum expectations for the content of the Commercial Operation & Maintenance Manual and IPB. The IPB for example should have a Table of Contents, Record of Changes, Foreword, Maintenance Parts List, and Numerical Index. The reference to the Tech Order is to give suggested guidance for how that content should be formatted and typically what is expected for content for those sections.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .