Module 04 / Lesson 4.2 · Self-study module

Prepare the IQ baseline and protocol

Define what will be checked, how, and against which controlled criteria.

1.9 minutes · English captions · Illustrations and worked example

This lesson’s core explanations and worked-example reasoning are narrated. The table restates the example for reference; the practice activity and model answer are reading exercises.

English captions available.

Read the lesson · Download captions · Download transcript

Narration and visual explanations

Open View Technical Explanation to see each diagram, its text description and the matching narration. Standard abbreviations and numerals are used visually.

Part 1 of 4

Reconcile the input package

View Technical Explanation · Diagram 1
Reconcile the input package — diagram 1. Description below.
Requirements, design decisions and controlled drawings support the IQ protocol; revision gaps remain visible. Key points: URS and DQ outcome; Drawings and specifications; Approved IQ protocol.

Lesson explanation

The fictional installation package contains the user requirements, design-review outcome, accepted drawings and an installation protocol. List identifiers and revisions before the walkdown. An email attachment labelled final is not enough to establish its approval status. If the valve drawing changed after design review, identify the change and its accepted impact before relying on the old conclusion.

Part 2 of 4

Write an executable check

View Technical Explanation · Diagram 2
Write an executable check — diagram 2. Description below.
A criterion links to a method and an evidence field; vague satisfactory wording has no defined comparator. Key points: Criterion and source; Method and instrument; Observation and reference.

Lesson explanation

Replace verify installation is satisfactory with a check another trained person can repeat. For example, compare the installed outlet valve tag and model against schedule revision C, using a safe visual inspection and the identified manufacturer plate. Define what information will be recorded and how inaccessible markings will be handled. Do not leave the acceptance rule to be invented after seeing the result.

Part 3 of 4

Check readiness safely

View Technical Explanation · Diagram 3
Check readiness safely — diagram 3. Description below.
Training, safe access and suitable tools are readiness inputs; this is not an isolation procedure. Key points: Trained personnel; Safe access and isolation; Suitable test equipment.

Lesson explanation

Before inspecting, confirm training, access arrangements and any required isolation with the responsible engineering team. Do not remove guards, open electrical panels or disconnect a process line merely to complete a checklist. If a marking cannot be reached safely, record that limitation and arrange an approved method. Schedule pressure does not turn an unsafe inspection into acceptable evidence.

Part 4 of 4

Resolve a missing criterion

View Technical Explanation · Diagram 4
Resolve a missing criterion — diagram 4. Description below.
A missing clearance criterion blocks its acceptance decision; an observed dimension is not a substitute requirement. Key points: No approved dimension; Record the gap; Resolve before evaluation.

Lesson explanation

Suppose the drawing shows a clearance but provides no approved minimum. Measuring a convenient distance and then calling it acceptable creates a circular argument. Raise the missing requirement to the responsible design and quality functions. The team may collect a clearly identified observation, but acceptance of that feature remains unresolved until the criterion and approach are properly established.

Worked example

Fictional worked example — not an approved site record
FieldTeaching entry
BaselineVAL-V201 revision C, fictional accepted schedule
CriterionTag/model match specified item
ObservationActual tag/model and location recorded
ExceptionUnreadable plate: identity unresolved

Apply it · Activity 2

Write an IQ check for outlet valve identity with baseline, criterion, safe method and evidence fields.

Open workbook activity
Compare with model reasoning

Name the controlled schedule and revision, required tag/model, visual method, actual observed identifiers, evidence reference, executor/date and discrepancy route. Confirm safe access; do not infer acceptance from an unapproved drawing.

Knowledge check

1. The protocol has no criterion for a clearance measurement. What is defensible?

Technical sources