MFG-RB01-P03 | Hardware qualification evidence review
Concept training procedure draft · D1 · 29 October 2026
For the inert browser model only. Not an approved operating SOP. No physical work, production release or certification is authorised.
Equipment: MFG-RB01
Model: 1.0.0-concept
Source basis: Original authored concept; no approved customer/OEM SOP supplied.

01. Confirm equipment and task identity.
Evidence: MFG-RB01 · Robot task development cell. Record draft D1 and model 1.0.0-concept.
HOLD if: Identity, source applicability or required evidence is missing or inconsistent.

02. Confirm the inert training boundary.
Evidence: For the inert browser model only. Not an approved operating SOP. No physical work, production release or certification is authorised.
HOLD if: Identity, source applicability or required evidence is missing or inconsistent.

03. Record the candidate robot and controller as unknown.
Evidence: Do not fill in an unprovided make, payload or software version.
HOLD if: Identity, source applicability or required evidence is missing or inconsistent.

04. List sensing and calibration dependencies.
Evidence: The inert scene supplies no live perception evidence.
HOLD if: Identity, source applicability or required evidence is missing or inconsistent.

05. Review the wrong-pick exception.
Evidence: A missing or mismatched part must not be treated as successful execution.
HOLD if: Identity, source applicability or required evidence is missing or inconsistent.

06. Separate simulation evidence from hardware evidence.
Evidence: The public viewer establishes only geometry interaction.
HOLD if: Identity, source applicability or required evidence is missing or inconsistent.

07. Specify the integrator-owned test environment.
Evidence: No production trial is authorised here.
HOLD if: Identity, source applicability or required evidence is missing or inconsistent.

08. Request a task-specific acceptance rubric.
Evidence: The rubric must include failures, recovery and stop conditions.
HOLD if: Identity, source applicability or required evidence is missing or inconsistent.

09. Capture unresolved limitations in the review record.
Evidence: No omitted test is implied to have passed.
HOLD if: Identity, source applicability or required evidence is missing or inconsistent.

10. Keep deployment authority with the qualified owner.
Evidence: This site issues no robot programme or execution approval.
HOLD if: Identity, source applicability or required evidence is missing or inconsistent.

11. Prepare the evidence record.
Evidence: Record observations, source revisions, holds, recovery and missing physical evidence; do not invent a result.
HOLD if: Identity, source applicability or required evidence is missing or inconsistent.

12. Request qualified review before reuse.
Evidence: Keep this draft unapproved until the task owner accepts the sources, geometry, criteria, permissions and revision.
HOLD if: Identity, source applicability or required evidence is missing or inconsistent.