Operating baseline
A versioned view of requirements, BOM, suppliers and the evidence available today.
Sample program · Illustrative only
Inspect the evidence behind a hardware decision.
Follow FS-01: an outdoor AI device needs an off-grid power kit. Explore illustrative BOM risks, supplier quote comparisons and approval records. Then follow an engineering change from missing inputs to the next review decision.
FS-01 / Flexible Solar for Edge AI
From requirements to delivery: the NPI workflow.
A 100-kit pilot is planned. A connector mismatch blocks quote comparison. Later snapshots follow change control, a quality hold and delivery. Choose a stage, open its documents and explore the client decision.
FS-01 / FLEXIBLE SOLAR FOR EDGE AI
Off-grid power. One connected program.
04 / BOM & NPI release
Review neededA connector change has to travel through the whole kit.
04 / Carry the change into the buildScene 1 / 4
Illustrative process · Synthetic records · Not a technical design
Initial evidence snapshot · Synthetic data
| Evidence | Reference | Condition |
|---|---|---|
| Change record | EC-01 | Review required |
| Interface & BOM | Drawing B / BOM B | Linked |
| Sample verification | SV-01 | Evidence needed |
Interactive prototype · No actual approvals or shipments. Each stage is an independent illustrative snapshot.
What the Audit includesFS-01 / Engineering change walkthrough
What changes when the AI device runs continuously?
Follow one proposed change from operating requirements to the evidence needed for release. See what needs review, who owns it and why a decision stays on hold.
Illustrative workflow · Synthetic records · No sized electrical design or completed customer project. This walkthrough explains a review method, not live automated impact analysis or release enforcement.
CR-017 · FS-01 · Illustrative change record
Event-triggered operation → continuous inference
Reduced motion: choose a step to explore.
Step 1 of 8 / Requirement change proposed
A new operating mode changes the requirement.
1Capture the request2Compare operating modes3Open a requirement revision
CLIENT REQUEST
Run inference continuously
Replace event-triggered operation with an always-on operating mode.
Source: change requestREQUIREMENT DIFF
REQ-017 / proposed R2
− Event-triggered
+ Continuous inference
Product owner reviewRequirement revision opened. No battery selection is justified yet.
The outdoor AI device would move from event-triggered operation to continuous inference. CR-017 records a proposed requirement revision before anyone selects a larger battery.
- Record to inspect
- REQ-017 / R2 proposed · Original scenario: event-triggered · Requested mode: continuous inference
- What remains open
- Measured demand and the operating conditions for the new mode are not supplied.
- Responsible owner
- Client product owner
- Next action
- Define the intended use and assign owners for the missing inputs.
Read the complete engineering change checklist
1. A new operating mode changes the requirement.
The outdoor AI device would move from event-triggered operation to continuous inference. CR-017 records a proposed requirement revision before anyone selects a larger battery.
Next action: Define the intended use and assign owners for the missing inputs.
2. Unknown power demand stays unknown.
Request measured load over time, peak and startup demand, deployment location, environmental conditions and the required operating duration. AI can organize supplied records; it cannot invent these inputs.
Next action: Supply measurements with their test conditions and source revision.
3. Review the power system, not just one part.
Engineering reviews whether the changed load affects generation, storage, power conversion, thermal behavior or mounting. Highlighted items are candidates for review, not confirmed replacement requirements.
Next action: Confirm the dependencies and the analyses or tests needed for each.
4. Every decision needs the right configuration.
Build a review register connecting the proposed configuration to BOM items, drawings, firmware, tests and quotes. Record their exact revisions and identify which records need to be updated or reconfirmed.
Next action: Assign each open record a source, owner and review action.
5. An incomplete basis cannot support a new release.
Keep the proposed continuous-inference configuration on hold while its requirements and verification basis remain open. Review the effect on specific orders or batches; a new proposal does not automatically invalidate every earlier configuration.
Next action: Resolve the named conditions before requesting this release.
6. A responsible engineer reviews the proposed solution.
The designated reviewer assesses compatibility, analysis assumptions, verification criteria and the proposed change scope. A previously qualified component still needs evidence that it suits this configuration.
Next action: Document the recommendation and return unresolved questions to their owners.
7. Approving a plan is not approving production.
The client reviews the proposed configuration and verification plan, purchasing commitments and production release as separate decisions. Each approval must refer to a defined version, scope and authorized decision-maker.
Next action: Approve only the decision supported by the available evidence.
8. The story ends with an honest open condition.
A future release record should connect the actual batch and as-built configuration to applicable test results, accepted deviations and the release authority. This example has none of that completed evidence, so R2 remains on hold.
Next action: Complete the agreed verification and review the results before release.
TAKE THE WORK WITH YOU
A sample your team
can actually review.
Open the FS-01 diagnostic snapshot: what is known, what remains open and what the next 90 days could involve. Share it with your engineering and commercial decision-makers.
Illustrative sample · Synthetic data · No registration required. Later lifecycle scenes are separate from this Audit snapshot.
Risk & decision register
Open conditions, impact, owner and the evidence needed for the next decision.
Quote decision memo
Comparable assumptions, supplier exceptions and a recommendation for client review.
Executive readout & 90-day plan
Prioritized actions, dependencies and a clear handoff to your team or a scoped engagement.
Additional work sample
Atlas M4 · An encoder quote decision
Inspect the original synthetic quote comparison and pending approval record.
Additional work sample
Atlas M4 · An encoder quote decision
Inspect the original synthetic quote comparison and pending approval record.
01 / Risk and decision record
One mismatch.
Four accountable handoffs.
The Audit identifies that the encoder quote and approved BOM reference different revisions. Before purchasing, the team needs a consistent specification, comparable quotes and a technical decision.
Current gate: supplier award.
Client approval is still pending.
Illustrative sample · Synthetic data
Atlas M4 · Pilot build · Rev C.2
An encoder revision mismatch puts the next build on hold.
The approved BOM calls for Rev C.2. The supplier quote still references Rev B. Q2D reconciles the baseline before the client commits spend.
- 01Reviewed
Establish the evidence / Q2D
BOM C.2, quote B and the specification are compared in one decision memo.
- 02Recommendation
Recommend a next step / Q2D
Request a Rev C.2 pilot sample from Supplier B, subject to technical qualification.
- 03Pending
Approve the decision / Client
Engineering approves the revision; the commercial owner approves supplier award and PO.
- 04On hold
Proceed after release / Supplier / CM
Pilot build starts only after client approval and the agreed evidence checks.
02 / Quote decision memo · Synthetic data
Compare on one approved baseline.
These illustrative supplier quotes are not yet equivalent. A lower unit price does not authorize an award; Q2D records the open conditions for the client to resolve.
| Comparison basis | Supplier A | Supplier B |
|---|---|---|
| Quoted revision | Rev B — correction required | Rev C.2 — qualification pending |
| Unit price / MOQ | $42 / 100 units | $39 / 100 units |
| Tooling / lead time | $0 / 8 weeks | $1,800 / 5 weeks |
| Goods + tooling for 100 units | $4,200 | $5,700 |
| Terms / currency | EXW / USD; 50% deposit | EXW / USD; 50% deposit |
| Excluded from totals | Freight, tax and inspection | Freight, tax and inspection |
| Open evidence | Corrected C.2 quotation | C.2 sample and inspection report |
Q2D recommendation: qualify Supplier B’s C.2 sample and obtain a corrected quote from Supplier A. The client then reviews technical fit, total cost and schedule.
Separate Q2D fees: services are defined in the Audit or execution scope, not embedded in the supplier unit prices shown here. These totals are not landed-cost estimates.
03 / Approval log and release evidence · Illustrative
A recommendation is not a release.
The sample record remains open. No PO, pilot build or shipment is shown as approved. These are the owners and evidence required to continue.
Pending sample qualification
BOM & NPI release
- Owner
- Client engineering
- Exit evidence
- Approved Rev C.2 baseline, qualified sample and change record.
Not started
Build & quality
- Owner
- Supplier / CM; Q2D coordinates
- Exit evidence
- Pilot inspection report and closure of client-approved deviations.
Blocked until build acceptance
Delivery & acceptance
- Owner
- Client release authority
- Exit evidence
- Inspection evidence, packing records, ship approval and receipt confirmation.
Each approval record should identify the approver, decision, document revision and timestamp. This sample contains no actual signed approvals or downloadable customer files.
04 / Executive readout and 90-day action plan · Illustrative
Turn the finding into the next operating cycle.
The readout prioritizes revision control and sample qualification. The schedule below is a planning example; progress depends on evidence and client decisions at each gate.
Days 0–30
Reconcile the baseline
Client engineering confirms the encoder revision. Q2D requests corrected quotes and logs missing evidence.
Days 31–60
Qualify and decide
Suppliers provide samples and inspection results. Q2D updates the comparison; the client decides award and spend.
Days 61–90
Build, review and carry forward
After release, the manufacturer runs the pilot. Q2D follows exceptions and records evidence for client acceptance.
Your program starts with its own evidence.
4–8 weeks · $10K–$20K · Fixed-scope Q2D Audit