A passing prototype is not a complete production-release record. After a pilot build, connect each open issue to the affected configuration, an approved disposition and evidence that the proposed action was checked. This guide addresses the decision after pilot results are available. For the earlier development stages, use the EVT, DVT and PVT handoff guide.
Define which configuration is being released
List the PCB, BOM, placement, drawing, firmware, fixture and test-procedure revisions used in the pilot. Compare them with the proposed production package. If they differ, identify the difference and its verification plan; do not let a pilot result silently approve a later configuration.
Record the tested quantity, any excluded units and the conditions of the evaluation. Keep first-pass results separate from results after retest or repair. A final pass count alone cannot explain whether a fixture problem, assembly issue or configuration change occurred.
Use an issue-closure register
| Field | What the release review needs |
|---|---|
| Issue and scope | Observed symptom, affected serials/lots, discovery point and relevant configuration. |
| Evidence | Original observation, measurement or log; the method and conditions used to obtain it. |
| Disposition | Hold, approved repair, configuration change or another explicitly approved action; identify its scope. |
| Verification | How the action was checked, which units were evaluated and where results are recorded. |
| Ownership | Responsible action owner and the function authorized to approve the technical and quality disposition. |
| Release decision | Closed, conditionally accepted or still open, with the approval reference and any lot restriction. |
Illustrative example: a retest does not erase a failure
Suppose one pilot board fails a connector check, then passes after it is reseated in a fixture. This example is hypothetical. Keep the first failure, fixture identification, intervention and retest result in the record. Passing after reseating does not establish whether the cause was a board connection, fixture contact or test setup.
Assign a check that distinguishes those explanations, document the result and decide whether other pilot units or future lots are affected. The SMT defect investigation guide helps separate an observed condition from an assumed cause. For an intermittent result, also review the fixture handoff requirements.
Check the controls that will change at volume
Review material source, approved alternates, panel arrangement, setup instructions, staffing assumptions, test sequence and packaging. Identify which proposed changes require a new first article or other verification under the agreed process. Pilot approval should state which configuration and conditions it covers.
For repeats, review the ICT fixture capacity and maintenance plan against the proposed schedule. Capacity is a planning assumption until the relevant resources and scope are confirmed.
Make the release decision explicit
Collect the configuration comparison, issue register, agreed acceptance criteria, first-article evidence and required delivery records. Record the decision, approver and affected build or lot. If an issue remains open, state whether it blocks release or is covered by a specific, approved exception. Do not label the whole program “production ready” based on an undocumented verbal agreement.
The first-article inspection checklist covers the unit-to-package review. The prototype-to-production readiness guide supplies the broader readiness worksheet. Use those records as inputs to the release decision rather than creating conflicting parallel approvals.
Reopen the review when its assumptions change
A new material, board revision, firmware image, fixture or process condition may affect the basis of approval. Route the change through the agreed change process, identify the verification needed and retain the connection to the earlier release. A successful pilot is evidence for the conditions actually reviewed; it is not unlimited approval for later variants.