Independent cases challenge the model with known engineering outcomes. Their expected answers should come from the source method, calculation or checked drawing independently of the candidate output. Copying today's actual result into the expected fields cannot demonstrate that the model is right.
Define a case with a basis
In Independent cases, enter Case key, Case name and Independent engineering basis. State the source inputs and Expected outcome. For a valid configuration, provide Expected named values and the Expected complete component list, including exact codes, revisions, counts and dimensions.
Include ordinary work, limits, optional components and blocking conditions. A case near an input step or dimensional limit answers a different question from another routine pass in the middle of the range. Where a table value matters, choose inputs that actually exercise that row and explain the source basis.
Save and investigate differences
Save draft records the model and cases together and computes proof. Inspect failures before submission. A disagreement can expose a model error, a wrong expectation or an incomplete source interpretation. Resolve it against the engineering source and record a clearer case basis where needed.
Do not remove a difficult case merely to obtain a passing summary. If the intended behaviour changes, update its expectation from the newly agreed source and let the reviewer see that changed basis. Saving another revision supersedes pending candidates for earlier mutable work.
Submit a reviewable scope
Submission requires passing independent proof and freezes the candidate, contributors and engineering impact. Everyone who changed either the model or expectations is excluded from approving it. Arrange an eligible different reviewer before submission, particularly where several authors have contributed.
At Brighouse works, Sarah calculates the frame kit's complete component list from the controlled drawing, including a width boundary that must block. James reviews the source calculation, saved proof and changed parts. Neither treats the candidate's output as the independent answer. Follow Review a candidate for that decision.