Technical audits and expert inspections
How an audit, inspection, observation, investigation and commissioning differ, how to plan a check, record evidence and word a finding, and how to verify a correction. Worked examples use AFS fabrication limits, piece counts and survey coverage.
4 lessons · about 45 min · 12 diagrams · 4 videos
Version 1.0.0
Builds on these modules
Lessons
0 of 4 complete
Lesson 1 · 12 min · 12 slides · 9 questions
Technical audits and expert inspections: principles and terminology
Five words that overlap in daily use, the three parts of every finding, what a non-conformance report is, the difference between quality control and quality assurance, who the expert is, and what any inspection cannot tell you.
You will be able to: Define audit, inspection, observation, investigation and commissioning, name criteria, evidence, finding and non-conformance report, say who counts as an expert, and state the safety boundaries.
Not startedStart →Lesson 2 · 11 min · 11 slides · 8 questions
Technical audits and expert inspections: materials, standards and design constraints
The layers of criteria, why inspection intervals differ by product and warranty, what infrared and electrical methods cover, how to cite a standard by its scope, and the AFS limits a shop order is checked against.
You will be able to: Name the layers of criteria an audit compares against, compare published inspection intervals and survey methods, say what a standard's scope does and does not cover, and read AFS's limits and nominal thicknesses.
Not startedStart →Lesson 3 · 11 min · 12 slides · 8 questions
Technical audits and expert inspections: methods and worked application
A step-by-step audit method, the checkpoints on a parapet coping, how to record evidence and word a finding, three worked examples with units, and how AFS's own stage records and takeoff flag follow the same logic.
You will be able to: Plan an audit with criteria, sample and milestones, build a checklist, record evidence and write a finding, then apply the method to an order line, a run of pieces and a survey.
Not startedStart →Lesson 4 · 11 min · 11 slides · 8 questions
Technical audits and expert inspections: defects, verification and case study
Evidence versus opinion, independence, why interior leaks need investigation, why a leaking roof is not accepted, how to verify repairs building-wide, what an expert opinion needs, and an illustrative three-record reconciliation.
You will be able to: Tell a finding that rests on evidence from an opinion, separate a checker with a stake from an independent one, explain why a leak may not be at the leak, verify a correction, and reconcile separate records in a case study.
Not startedStart →
Practical task
Part 1 (shop): audit three illustrative order lines against the AFS limits in this module, one with every limit met, one blocked by gauge and one with an end flange that is too short, and keep a findings log. Part 2 (field or office): write a one-page observation plan for a parapet coping installation with milestones, a checklist whose items each name their source document, the evidence you will keep and a blank non-conformance report.
Hand in
- A decision rationale for each order line: the criteria used, the result (OK, shop review or blocked) and the limit that decided it
- A marked-up sketch of the parapet coping section with each checkpoint lettered, as in the module figure, and the document each checkpoint comes from
- An assumptions sheet with units: leg lengths, hem fold, piece length, gauge and thickness, each labelled AFS register, source document or assumed
- A quality checklist for the coping observation, grouped as field and shop items, with the source of each item
- A defect analysis for one finding: place, observation with unit, criterion and its document, result, the correction and how you will verify it
Rubric
| Criterion | Meets the standard when |
|---|---|
| Criteria | Every result names the criterion and the document or AFS register it came from; no sampling rate, tolerance or code limit is invented. |
| Calculations | Girth, piece count and any survey coverage are worked with units and match the limits in the module. |
| Evidence | Each finding gives the place, the observation with its unit, the criterion and the result, and says what could not be judged. |
| Independence and limits | The plan says who checks, whether they have a stake, and what the checks cannot show; no finding is written as a legal conclusion. |
| Verification | Each correction has a way to verify it and says whether it must be checked elsewhere in the building or order. |