Smartlogic

Menu

תגית: OQ

ולידציה – 3 Validation case study – part

Posted on by אביב צברי

ולידציה – 3 Validation case study – part

 This article was written by Iian Shaya, validation,automation and control expert

אילן שעיה Ilan Shaya
Ilan Shaya CEO , control and automation specialist and designer

Documentation for IQ and OQ – to be checked at PDI/FAT

Welding reports

Surfaces finishing test reports

PDI and FAT results

As-built drawings, 3 sets in nominated project language, plus 1 set in English

As-installed versions of all documentation submitted for design review

Back-up software on diskette/CD-ROM, as appropriate, ready for re-installment

Machine configuration/start up, set-up and commissioning data, including tabulation of all change parts and identifications

Full machine parts list

Complete documentation (protocols and method statements) required for equipment DQ, calibration, IQ and OQ specified for manual and automatic operations

Calibration certificates for all required instruments to NIST

Specification for all parts manufactured by sub-contractors

Full identification of all parts according to the P&ID, including valves, regulators, instruments, pipes, media and flow direction arrows

Tags for electrical and pneumatic wiring

Documentation to ensure qualification in compliance with FDA and EMEA, as outlined above

DQ Protocols Including PC/PLC

Approval

Statement of purpose

System description

Traceability matrix

IQ Protocols Including PC/PLC

Approval

Statement of purpose

System description

Specifications

Materials in product contact

Engineering drawings

Subsystem inspection

Components

Piping

Valves

Instrumentation and calibrations

PC/PLC requirement definition

Software development documentation

Manual / technical literature

Test equipment data sheet

Component data sheets

Utility requirements

Exceptional conditions, if required

Summary

OQ Protocols Including PC/PLC

Statement of purpose

System description

Manual and automatic control over all modules through HMI

PC/PLC validation protocols

Step-by-step checking of schedule of system operation – SSO

Alarm and message reaction

HMI synoptic screen vs. P&ID

System operation tests

Operation tests for HMI to ensure compliance with 21 CFR part 11

Application software certification

HW documentation

SW code

SW components data sheets

HW components data sheets

PLC configuration

Graph printout

Synoptic screen list and printout

Operation screen list and printout

Parameters list screen

Messages and alarms list, and printout

HW inspections

SW inspections and application

Approved schematic description

Ladder diagram validation

PLC capabilities

PLC accuracy

SW development documentation

List of control devices

Exceptional conditions

Reports – verification of authorization inspection

PQ Protocols Including PC/PLC

Statement of purpose

Analysis procedures

Staff instruction

Plan for sampling

Criteria for acceptance

 This article was written by Iian Shaya, validation,automation and control expert

ולדיציה – Validation case study – part 1

Posted on by אביב צברי

ולדיציה -1 Validation Requirements – case study- part

 This article was written by Iian Shaya, validation,automation and control expert

Validation Requirements is a document which may be part of the validation documentation that describes the validation strategy for a system or subsystem. This document is generic; the system or subsystem may include a PC with Human/Machine Interface (HMI), a Programmable Logic Controller (PLC), virtual hardware (HW), software (SW), and other components designed to maintain the user's facility in proper conditions specified by the user.

Validation Requirements Document Contents

This document is structured in a relatively standard fashion, with predetermined chapters and sections, where the final contents are tailored according to the type and size of the system under validation.

The main chapters and sections of a Validation Requirements document are:

Responsibility

Validation Requirements

Documentation for Initial Tender

Documentation for Design Review

Documentation Prior to Factory Acceptance Test (FAT) or Pre-Delivery Inspection – PDI

Commissioning

Documentation For Installation and Operational Qualification (IQ and OQ) – to be checked at PDI/FAT

Design Qualification (DQ) Protocols (Including PC/PLC) Architecture

Installation Qualification (IQ) Protocols (Including PC/PLC

Operational Qualification (OQ) Protocols (Including PC/PLC

Performance Qualification (PQ) Protocols

Computerized System Validation

Responsibility

This section lists the responsibilities of contractor, the user, and the required contents of the documents composing the validation file

The contractor is responsible for creation and performing the DQ, Design Review, Commissioning, IQ and OQ validation protocols

The user is responsible for creation and performing the PQ validation protocols

Design Qualification (DQ) – The design of the system will be documented and checked in the Design Specification. This specification will include details of the system and must be traceable to the URS and BOD documents

Mechanical Completion Check Report (MCCR) of the system will be documented and checked only by the contractor. This document will check system readiness for the IQ

Commissioning Execution (CE) of the system will be documented and checked only by the contractor. This document will check system readiness for  OQ

Installation Qualification –IQ

IQ will establish documented evidence that the system is installed according to the manufacturers’ specifications and user requirements, and assure that the environment is appropriate for its intended purpose

Each IQ protocol will include an appendix of deviation report, which describes the deviations (if they existent) of the specific system, and the contractor will be responsible to correct them

Operational Qualification – OQ

OQ will establish documented evidence that the system is operated according to manufacturers’ specifications and user requirements, and assure that the environment is appropriate for its intended purpose

OQ will establish documented evidence that the system is operated according to manufacturers’ specifications

.Each OQ protocol will include an appendix of deviation report, which describes the deviations (if they existent) of the specific system, and the contractor will be responsible to correct them

Performance Qualification- PQ

PQ will establish documented evidence that the system performs according to manufacturers’ specifications and user requirements, and assure that the environment is appropriate for its intended purpose

The PQ protocols are user's responsibility

 This article was written by Iian Shaya, validation,automation and control expert

ולידציה – FRS – Regulatory & HMI Requirements

Posted on by אביב צברי

ולידציה – FRS – Regulatory & HMI Requirements

 This article was written by Iian Shaya, validation,automation and control expert

Regulatory Requirements

These requirements cover all the FDA specifications regarding the system compliance with the 21 CFR Part 11 definitions, and also with usual validation documentation demands

Method to provide a computerized system that complies with 21 CFR Part 11 definitions, such as the system access control by the user's managing personnel, who shall be responsible for the content of the electronic records (ERs) contained in the system

Method to restrict logical access to the system according to specified authorization levels

Method to restrict logical access to the system only to specific user ID and password

Method to provide system capability to record the values, alarms, user changes and any other events, and provide readable forms and reports of ER data

Method to allow storage of historical events, current alarms and historical alarms data records on the computerized system database

Capability of data display to the user in "view only" mode, so the user cannot alter or delete data/records

Provision of user's capability to backup data daily, weekly and monthly, according to his procedures, to ensure protection of the records and to enable their accurate and ready retrieval throughout the records retention period

Provision by the supplier of a project plan and quality assurance (QA) processes during development and the testing stages as part of his QA systems

Provision by the supplier of the following documents

Functional Requirements Specification – FRS

Functional Design Specification- FDS

IO List

Schedule of System Operation – SSO

Installation Qualification (IQ) protocol

Operation Qualification (OQ) protocol

Performance Qualification (PQ) protocol

HMI Requirements

These requirements are intended to provide the URS demands from the HMI screens, regarding proper graphic design and functionality for controlling and monitoring the system, as specified in customer's contract with the supplier. The HMI screens provided usually are of the following types

Main Screen

Synoptic screens for displaying online values and status

Parameters screens for displaying temperature, humidity and pressure parameters values

Data logging and storage of historical trends, alarms and events

Tabular screens for displaying alarms

Graphical screens for displaying trends

 This article was written by Iian Shaya, validation,automation and control expert

ולידציה – URS – Regulatory & HMI Requirements

Posted on by אביב צברי

ולידציה – URS – Regulatory & HMI Requirements

 This article was written by Iian Shaya, validation,automation and control expert

Regulatory Requirements

These requirements cover all the FDA specifications regarding the system compliance with the 21 CFR Part 11 definitions, and also with usual validation documentation demands

Computerized system compliance with 21 CFR Part 11 definitions, such as the system access control by the user's managing personnel, who shall be responsible for the content of the electronic records (ERs) contained in the system

System capability of restricting logical access to the system according to specified authorization levels.

Access to the system allowed only by user ID and a specific password

System capability to record the values, alarms, user changes and any other events, and provide readable forms and reports of ER data

Storage of historical events, current alarms and historical alarms data records on the computerized system database

Data display to the user in "view only" mode, so the user cannot alter or delete data/records

Provision of user's capability to backup data daily, weekly and monthly, according to his procedures, to ensure protection of the records and to enable their accurate and ready retrieval throughout the records retention period.

Provision by the supplier of a project plan and quality assurance (QA) processes during development and the testing stages as part of his QA systems

Provision by the supplier of the following documents

Functional Requirements Specification –FRS.

Functional Design Specification – FDS

IO List

Schedule of System Operation – SSO

Installation Qualification (IQ) protocol.

Operation Qualification (OQ) protocol

Performance Qualification (PQ) protoco

HMI Requirements

These requirements cover the provisions demanded from the HMI screens, regarding proper graphic design and functionality for controlling and monitoring the system, as specified in customer's contract with the supplier

:Note

The final contents of the URS and FRS are tailored according to the type and size of the system under validation. Since the URS and FRS regarded herein are generic, they include requirements that may not be necessary in small or simple systems

 This article was written by Iian Shaya, validation,automation and control expert

ולידציה – Operation Qualification – OQ- part 2

Posted on by אביב צברי

ולידציה – Operation Qualification – OQ- part 2

Protocol Preparation Overview

This article provide overviews of the main test procedures and verification, and their purposes. This OQ procedure is generic, and relevance of the test procedures and verifications provided below depends on the composition of the system under validation

:Note

As mentioned in the previous artcle on OQ Protocol Contents, the final contents of the OQ protocol are tailored according to the type and size of the system under validation. Since this document is generic, it covers test procedures that may not be necessary in small or simple systems

:Where relevant, the OQ procedure may consists of five main test procedures

HMI Screen Test Procedure – intended to verify that the HMI screens provide the graphic design and functionality required for properly monitoring and controlling the environmental conditions in the user's

Parameters Lists Verification – intended to verify that the system parameters lists comply with the values specified in the SSO

: Two types of parameters are checked

Process parameters

Alarm parameters

System Operation Test Procedure – intended to verify that system monitoring and control components are capable of maintaining the user's facility within specified temperature, humidity and pressure levels

System Alarms Test Procedure – intended to verify that when the specified temperature, humidity and pressure levels exceed its specified limits, an alarm message is displayed, and an SMS or e-mail notification is sent to relevant personnel

Test of HMI Compliance with 21 CFR Part 11 – This test is intended to verify that the HMI meets Valtech Cardio's URS regarding 21 CFR Part 11. These : requirements are divided into 5 categories for the sake of clarity

Security

Electronic Records

Audit Trail

Archive

Backup

 HMI Screen Test Procedure

This section includes specific test procedures for all the relevant HMI screens, where each test procedure serves to verify that the specific HMI screen provides the graphic design and functionality required for its intended purpose within the monitoring and controlling functions

Parameters Lists Verification

:This procedure covers the verifications of two types of parameters

Process parameters

Alarm parameters

Process Parameters List Verification

This procedure is intended to verify that:

The system enables to set the default values of the process set-points of each monitored environmental parameter.

The system provides automatically the corresponding low and high limits of these default values. These limit values are listed in  below

The system rejects all the SP values that exceed their allowed ranges, as specified in the SSO

Alarm Parameters List Verification

:This procedure is intended to verify that

The system enables to set the default values of the alarm set-points of each monitored environmental parameter

The system provides automatically the corresponding low and high limits of these default values

The system rejects all the SP values that exceed their allowed ranges, as specified in the SSO

 System Operation Test Procedure

This procedure is intended to verify that system monitoring and control components are capable of maintaining the user's facility within specified temperature, humidity and pressure levels. For this purpose, it is necessary to temporarily change set-points, in order to activate the control devices

System Alarms Test Procedures

This procedure is intended to verify that, when an environmental parameter value exceeds the specified normal range, the system reacts as specified in the SSO, by providing a specified alarm indication, a relevant e-mail alarm message, and relevant records in the Current Alarms and Historical Alarms screens

Test of HMI Compliance with 21 CFR Part 11

This test is intended to verify that the HMI meets the user's URS regarding 21 CFR Part 11. These requirements are divided into 5 categories for the sake of :clarity

Security

Electronic Records

Audit Trail

Archive

Backup

 

ולידציה – Operation Qualification – OQ- part 1

Posted on by אביב צברי

ולידציה – Operation Qualification – OQ- part 1

Protocol Preparation Overview

The Operation Qualification (OQ) protocol is part of the validation documentation that covers the verification of the proper operation of the system under validation in the user's facility. This OQ protocol is generic, and the system may include a PC with Human/Machine Interface (HMI), a Programmable Logic Controller* (PLC), pressure, temperature and humidity transmitters, and other monitoring and control components designed to maintain the user's facility in proper environmental conditions (temperature, pressure and humidity)

This OQ protocol is intended to verify that the system under validation operates according to the acceptance criteria specified in the Schedule of System Operation (SSO), and also meets the vendor's requirements and the user's specifications. It must be reviewed and approved prior to the OQ performance

OQ Protocol Contents

The OQ protocol is structured in a relatively standard fashion, with predetermined chapters and sections, where the final contents are tailored according to the type and size of the system under validation

:The chapters and sections of an OQ protocol are

Documents Verification – procedure intended to verify that all the documents required for performing the OQ procedure are approved and available

OQ Test Procedures – this is the main part of the protocol, and provides the description of the test procedures and the result tables for filling and approving the test results

: Note

As the final contents of the OQ protocol are tailored according to the type and size of the system under validation, and this document is generic, it covers test procedures that may not be necessary in small or simple systems

Documents Verification

:This procedure is intended to verify that all the documents required for performing the OQ procedure are approved and available. These documents are

Functional Requirements Specification (FRS)

Installation Qualification (IQ) Protocol

Piping and Instrumentation Drawing – P&ID

Input/Output (I/O) List

Schedule of System Operation (SSO)

OQ Test Procedures

This chapter contains all the test procedures or verification required to verify the system under validation is properly installed and can be properly operated according to the supplier's requirements and user's specifications

:Each test procedure or verification must include the same contents

Purpose or Objective

Procedure or Method

Acceptance Criteria

Test Results

*Here are some examples of the PLCs used by smartlogic: 6XV1830-0EH10, 6ES7131-4BF00-0AA0,6ES7193-4CA40-0AA0,6ES7134-4GD00-0AB0,6ES7193-4CA40-0AA0, 6ES7138-4CA01-0AA0,6ES7193-4CC20-0AA0, 6ES7590-1AB60-0AA0, 6ES7511-1AK00-0AB0, 6ES7954-8LP01-0AA0,6ES7155-6AU00-0BN0

ולידציה -Testing Process Automation Systems

Posted on by אביב צברי

ולידציה – Testing Process Automation Systems  

 Testing Responsibilities  Supplier and User

Where a Supplier has been assessed and its quality management system found to be acceptable, the User may benefit from the testing already carried out as part of the product development life cycle in order to minimize additional testing.

Similarly, the User may benefit from the testing carried out by the Supplier as part of the application, for example, to allow a small sample of tests to be repeated at witnessed FAT.

                        Example of Life Cycle for a Custom Application

Supplier Product Life Cycle

For example in a life cycle where a new application is developed for an embedded control system,  the Supplier's product may be SW or tools used to develop the User specific application. The Supplier of the control system has been assessed and its quality management system found to be acceptable. Thus, the User does not need to repeat the testing of product functionality. The testing should instead concentrate on the application of the control system

     End User Application Life Cycle

Assuming that the application is critical to product quality and includes a custom sequence coded as a sequence function chart, a test approach could be agreed :that includes the following elements

Supplier's module testing of the sequence function chart program.

Supplier's integration testing (100% test) and FAT (sampled) to demonstrate correct interaction configuration of the control system and correct operation of the process equipment.

SAT and IQ/OQ/PQ of the control system as part of the process equipment.

                      Example of Life Cycle for a Standard Application

                   Supplier Product Life Cycle

In the case  of a life cycle where a standard application is purchased containing an embedded control system, the control system Supplier has been assessed and its quality management system found to be acceptable. Thus, the User does not need to repeat the testing of product functionality (including mature library functions such as standard control modules) or of the standard application. The testing has to cover only the setup and use of the application.

                    End User Application Life Cycle

Assuming that the application is still critical to product quality, there is now much lower risk associated with the application development, as the configuration is limited to selecting the required functions and entering setup parameters. A test approach could, therefore, be agreed including the following elements:

FAT to demonstrate correct setup of the control system and correct operation of the process equipment.

SAT and IQ/OQ/PQ of the control system as part of the process equipment.

ולידציה -Testing and HW/SW Type and Maturity

Posted on by אביב צברי

ולידציה -Testing and HW/SW Type and Maturity – GAMP

Process automation systems generally comprise several elements. Categorizing these elements according to those described in GAMP 4 can assist in targeting testing and validation effort.

Some functional elements may be fully contained within the system standard packages or firmware (FW), while others may require different degrees of configuration or customization. In general, the greater the degree of customization, the greater the scope of testing required.

For example, if an item of the process equipment is to be controlled, the User may have several options for implementing the process control system functional element.

:Typical Test Phases for Process Automation Systems

Complex control exists as single, mature 'equipment level' library module, where functions can be selected/ deselected and  setup parameters entered

For example, sterilizer module with selectable cycle types

Application Life Cycle Testing: selection of functions, setup parameters

:Typical Test Phases

FAT and /or

SAT

IQ/OQ/PQ of process equipment

Complex control built up from mature, interlinked 'device level' library modules, which must have correct parameters entered

For example, sterilizer control, built up from valve, motor, PID, set-point program modules.

Application Life Cycle Testing: selection and linking of modules functions to give correct functionality, setup parameters

:Typical Test Phases

FAT

SAT

IQ/OQ/PQ of process equipment

Complex control built up from application specific modules, themselves built up from low-level library modules, or from simple coded steps within a predefined structure.

For example, sterilizer control configured in ladder logic

Application Life Cycle Testing: functionality of custom coded modules, selection and linking of modules functions to give correct functionality, setup parameters

:Typical Test Phases

Module test

FAT

SAT

IQ/OQ/PQ of process equipment

Complex control custom added

For example, sterilizer control coded in C++

Application Life Cycle Testing: functionality of custom coded modules, interaction between custom coded modules, selection and linking of modules functions to give correct functionality,setup parameters.

:Typical Test Phases

Module test

Module integration test

FAT

SAT

IQ/OQ/PQ of process equipment

:Notes

The suggested test phases listed above are typical only; they may be increased or decreased to reflect the complexity of the application, and the impact on product quality, patient safety and data integrity

The above assumes mature, 'industry proven' library modules. If these are created specifically for the application, then they need to be treated as custom code

Smartlogic expertise in validation of current and new systems to meet the most rigid requirements of the FDA and CFR protocols.

ולידציה – GAMP – Test Example – part 3

Posted on by אביב צברי

Good Automated Manufacturing Practice (GAMP) – Test Example

Testing Process Automation Systems

This article cover  the third part of  our  Good Automated Manufacturing Practice (GAMP) test example. This part will cover  the typical test phases for Factory Acceptance Test – FAT, Site Acceptance Test – SAT / Installation Qualification – IQ, Operation Qualification – OQ and Performance Qualification – PQ

Typical Test Phases – GAMP – Test Example

 Typical test phases for a complex process automation system. This example assumes that the system is configured by a Supplier and delivered to site after a FAT. Test system can also be configured by the system integrator or by the User. In this case, the same coverage is required, but the test phasing and location may be different.

The User and Supplier should work together to develop an overall approach to testing that reflects the risk assessment output and ensures adequate test coverage of the functionality, whilst avoiding unnecessary repeated tests.

Factory Acceptance Test – FAT

Done at the Supplier's premises after Supplier's integration testing, and before the system is released for delivery to the User's site

The required coverage should reflect the relative risk priority associated with the system element under test. This coverage can increase if problem are found within the initial sample.

In determining the required coverage, the User needs to base decisions on the risk assessment output taking into account both the potential effect on product quality and safety resulting from the process, and the intrinsic risk likelihood associated with the method of implementation.

Before performing risk assessment to decide on the required coverage, the User should review the supplier's internal tests to confirm that they are adequately documented.

Site Acceptance Test – SAT / Installation Qualification – IQ

Done at the User's premises after installation of the system on site

:The required coverage should include

Checking that the full system, including HW, SW backups, and documentation has been delivered to site in a condition suitable to its intended purpose

Checking that the site environment suits the specification of the installed equipment: temperature, humidity, pressure, dust, vibration, interference, etc

Checking that the system has been correctly installed.

Demonstration the system still operates as it was when accepted during the FAT, typically by re-recording system components and versions, and by re-repeating a small sample of FATs on site

Testing any elements which could be adequately tested in the FAT environment, typically interfaces to other equipment, networks, etc

Re-testing, following remedial action on any element subject to conditional release at the end of the FAT

Operation Qualification – OQ and Performance Qualification – PQ

Done at the User's premises after SAT/IQ

If a system has been fully tested in the FAT, after successful completion of the IQ (along with any additional field functional tests and calibrations), the system is treated as an integrated part of the process equipment qualification. This should ensure that the full system, procedures and trained personnel are ready for production.

End of GAMP – Test Example – part 3.

 

ולידציה – GAMP – Test Example – part 1

Posted on by אביב צברי

Good Automated Manufacturing Practice (GAMP) – Test Example

Testing Process Automation Systems

This article cover  the first part of  our  Good Automated Manufacturing Practice (GAMP) test example.

                                     Definitions

This section provides brief descriptions of three different types of process control systems.

                  Configurable Equipment

Configurable Equipment is the collective name given to simple configurable instruments/ devices, such as 3-term controllers, check scales, bar code readers, etc. Their functionality depends on that their configuration setup meets the process requirements. The software (SW) components of these systems are typically defined as GAMP SW Category 2.

                    Embedded Systems

Embedded Systems is the collective name for systems with a greater degree of configuration and programmability. Devices such as Integrated Circuits (ICs) with configuration setups and Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs), which are supplied as an integral part to an item of process equipment, e.g., PLCs controlling a centrifuge or packaging machine, or IC embedded in High Performance Liquid Chromatography (HPLC) systems. Embedded Systems typically contain SW components belonging to multiple GAMP categories.

                 Stand-Alone Systems

Stand-Alone Systems is the collective name for large programmable control systems having distributed functionality across a network, e.g., Distributed Control Systems (DCSs), and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA). They are engineered as an entity to control a complete plant. Stand-Alone Systems typically contain SW components belonging to multiple GAMP categories.

                      Testing and the GAMP Life Cycle 

     Stand-Alone Systems

A process automation system developed for a new application typically requires some or all of the following test phases:

Suppliers Module Testing

Suppliers Module Integration Testing

Suppliers Integration Testing

Factory Acceptance Test (FAT)

Site Acceptance Test (SAT)

Installation Qualification (IQ)

Operation Qualification (OQ)

Performance Qualification (PQ)

The exact combination of testing required for a particular system should reflect its complexity, the maturity of its underlying SW and hardware (HW) elements, and the risk impact on product quality, patient safety and data integrity. Collectively these will determine the risk priority. The phrase 'low risk' should be understood as 'having a low risk priority, as determined by a formal risk assessment'.

Testing of modifications, patches or upgrades should be related to the risk priority of the change. For example, it may be appropriate for parameter changes to be applied directly to the production environment, assuming that the system have been range checked for such parameter.

End of ולידציה – GAMP – Test Example – part 1