Asset Registry--Systems Management (AX02US02)
Verification Points - COMPLETE THREE-STEP WIZARD VALIDATION
- Primary_Verification:
- AC02: Complete three-step wizard process functions correctly with all required fields
- AC18: All data validation rules work correctly with appropriate error messages
- Criticality Calculation: Mathematical formula produces correct weighted score
- Data Persistence: All form data preserved across steps and saved to database
- Secondary_Verifications:
- Navigation: Step progression works correctly with proper validation
- Auto-population: Facility selection triggers address and coordinate updates
- Real-time Updates: Criticality score updates immediately when sliders move
- File Management: Upload, progress, and removal functionality works correctly
- Negative_Verification:
- Required Field Validation: Cannot proceed without completing required fields
- Format Validation: Invalid emails, coordinates, and file types rejected
- Business Logic: Date constraints and capacity validations enforced
Systems Management Test Cases - AX02US02
Test Scenario Summary
Functional Test Scenarios
- Core System Registry Management: CRUD operations for water systems
- Multi-step System Registration: 3-step wizard workflow
- Real-time Dashboard Operations: KPI monitoring and filtering
- Asset Association Management: Connecting assets to systems
- Performance Monitoring: Real-time metrics and alerts
- Compliance Tracking: Water quality parameter monitoring
- Financial Management: Depreciation and cost tracking
Non-Functional Test Scenarios
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA COVERAGE MATRIX
Acceptance Criteria | Test Cases Covering | Validation Method |
AC01: Comprehensive dashboard with total systems, operational status, maintenance status, high criticality | TC_001, TC_014 | KPI calculations, database queries |
AC02: Three-step system registration (basic info, location, operational parameters, criticality, contacts) | TC_002, TC_003, TC_004 | Complete wizard flow validation |
AC03: System detail pages with 11 tabs (Performance, Alerts, Finance, Compliance, etc.) | TC_005, TC_006, TC_007, TC_008, TC_009, TC_015 | Tab navigation and content validation |
AC04: Real-time performance monitoring with system health index, availability, compliance | TC_005, TC_016 | Formula validation, real-time data checks |
AC05: Alert management with critical components, anomalies, maintenance notifications | TC_008, TC_017 | Alert categorization and workflow validation |
AC06: Asset management with condition scores, risk scores, uptime percentages | TC_007, TC_018 | Asset association and metrics validation |
AC07: Service order management with status tracking and priority assignment | TC_019 | Workflow and status transition validation |
AC08: Water quality monitoring with real-time parameter tracking | TC_006, TC_020 | Parameter compliance and calculation validation |
AC09: Financial tracking with book value, depreciation, component end-of-life | TC_009, TC_021 | Financial formula validation |
AC10: Compliance monitoring with automated parameter checking | TC_006, TC_020 | Regulatory compliance validation |
AC11: File management with metadata tracking | TC_004, TC_022 | File upload and metadata validation |
AC12: Notes and comments with search and user attribution | TC_023 | Note management validation |
AC13: Activity logs with chronological display | TC_024 | Activity tracking validation |
AC14: Role-based access control | TC_013, TC_025 | Permission validation by role |
AC15: Mobile-responsive interfaces | TC_010, TC_026 | Responsive design validation |
AC16: Data export functionality | TC_001, TC_027 | Export feature validation |
AC17: Search and filtering capabilities | TC_001, TC_028 | Search algorithm validation |
AC18: Data validation with error messages | TC_002, TC_029 | Validation rule testing |
AC19: Automated notifications | TC_008, TC_030 | Notification trigger validation |
AC20: External system integration | TC_011, TC_031 | API integration validation |
Test Case TC_001: Systems Registry Dashboard Load with ALL KPI Validations
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_001
- Title: Verify Systems Registry Dashboard with ALL Acceptance Criteria - KPI Calculations and Navigation
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: 2025-01-18
- Version: 2.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke
- Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 3 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 90%
- Integration_Points: Dashboard-API, Database, Real-time-Data
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX02
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Quality-Dashboard, Module-Coverage
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Database server, SCADA integration service
- Performance_Baseline: Page load < 3 seconds
- Data_Requirements: 10 sample systems with varying statuses
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Admin user logged in, sample systems data populated
- User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager or Plant Supervisor role
- Test_Data:
- 10 total systems (7 operational, 1 under maintenance, 6 high criticality)
- Sample facilities: Main Treatment Plant, North Distribution Center
- Mock SCADA data for real-time metrics
- Prior_Test_Cases: Login functionality (TC_LOGIN_001)
Test Procedure -
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Formula/Navigation Validation |
AC01: COMPREHENSIVE DASHBOARD VALIDATION |
|
|
|
|
1 | Navigate via Dashboard > Asset Registry > Systems | Systems page loads with breadcrumb: "Dashboard > Asset Registry > Systems" | N/A | Verify breadcrumb navigation path, URL: /dashboard/asset-registry/systems |
2 | Verify page title and subtitle | Title: "Systems", Subtitle: "Manage and monitor all operational systems within your utility" | N/A | Text content validation, check for typos |
3 | TOTAL SYSTEMS KPI VALIDATION | Formula: COUNT(System_ID) from Systems_Table | Expected: 10 systems | SQL: SELECT COUNT(*) FROM systems WHERE deleted_at IS NULL |
4 | Verify tooltip on Total Systems | Tooltip: "Total Registered Systems - The total number of systems, regardless of status, that are registered in the asset management platform." | N/A | Hover validation, tooltip content accuracy |
5 | OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS KPI VALIDATION | Formula: COUNT(System_ID) WHERE Status = 'Operational' | Expected: 7 operational | SQL: SELECT COUNT(*) FROM systems WHERE status = 'Operational' AND deleted_at IS NULL |
6 | Verify operational tooltip | Tooltip: "Operational Systems - The number of systems that are currently active and functioning as expected." | N/A | Tooltip validation on hover |
7 | UNDER MAINTENANCE KPI VALIDATION | Formula: COUNT(System_ID) WHERE Status = 'Under Maintenance' | Expected: 1 maintenance | SQL: SELECT COUNT(*) FROM systems WHERE status = 'Under Maintenance' AND deleted_at IS NULL |
8 | HIGH CRITICALITY KPI VALIDATION | Formula: COUNT(System_ID) WHERE Criticality IN ('High', 'Very High') | Expected: 6 high criticality | SQL: SELECT COUNT(*) FROM systems WHERE criticality IN ('High', 'Very High') AND deleted_at IS NULL |
AC16: DATA EXPORT FUNCTIONALITY |
|
|
|
|
9 | Click Export Data button | CSV/Excel download dialog appears | N/A | File download validation, MIME type check |
10 | Download and open export file | File contains all visible filtered systems with correct data | Current filter state | File validation: Headers match table columns, data accuracy |
11 | Verify export filename format | Format: "systems_export_YYYY-MM-DD_HH-MM.csv" | Current timestamp | Filename pattern validation |
AC17: SEARCH AND FILTERING CAPABILITIES |
|
|
|
|
12 | Clear all filters | Click Total Systems card to reset | N/A | Navigation: All filters cleared, 10 systems visible |
13 | Test search box with System ID | Enter "SYS-001" in search box | "SYS-001" | Real-time filtering: Table shows only SYS-001 row |
14 | Verify search algorithm | Search works on System ID, Name, Type columns | Various search terms | Algorithm: Case-insensitive partial matching on specified columns |
15 | Test search with System Name | Enter "Primary Intake" | "Primary Intake" | Table filters to matching system names |
16 | Test search with System Type | Enter "Pumping" | "Pumping" | Table filters to pumping station types |
17 | Clear search | Delete search text | N/A | Search reset: All 10 systems visible again |
18 | Open Filters dropdown | Click Filters button | N/A | Navigation: Dropdown/modal with filter options opens |
19 | Test Status filter | Select "Operational" from Status filter | Multiple selection | Filter application: Only operational systems shown |
20 | Test Criticality filter | Select "High, Very High" from Criticality filter | Multi-select | Filter combination: Shows operational AND high criticality systems |
21 | Test Type filter | Select "Pumping Station" from Type filter | System type | Filter chaining: All 3 filters applied simultaneously |
22 | Clear all filters | Click "Clear Filters" or reset | N/A | Filter reset: All systems visible, filter UI cleared |
SYSTEMS REGISTRY TABLE VALIDATION |
|
|
|
|
33 | Verify all table columns present | System ID, System Name, Type, Status, Criticality, Facility, Location, Date Established, Design Capacity, Current Throughput, Actions | N/A | Table structure: All required columns visible and labeled correctly |
34 | Verify System ID | System IDs are visible | Click SYS-001 | - |
35 | Verify System ID format | Format: SYS-XXX (auto-generated) | Various system IDs | Data validation: System ID follows naming convention |
36 | Verify Status color coding | Operational=Green, Under Maintenance=Orange, etc. | All status types | Visual validation: Consistent color coding across statuses |
37 | Verify Criticality display | Very High=Red, High=Red, Medium=Yellow, Low=Green | All criticality levels | Color coding: Matches criticality assessment scale |
38 | Verify Design Capacity units | All values show in MGD (Million Gallons per Day) | Capacity values | Unit validation: Consistent MGD units, proper formatting |
39 | Verify Current Throughput calculation | Real-time/recent measurement values | SCADA integration | Real-time data: Values update from operational systems |
40 | Test Actions kebab menu | Click (...) menu for each system | Each system row | Menu options: View Details, Edit System, Create Service Order, Delete System |
41 | Verify kebab menu permissions | Options available based on user role | Current user role | Permission validation: Menu items match role capabilities |
42 | Test pagination controls | Navigate between pages if >25 systems | Large dataset | Pagination: Previous/Next buttons, page numbers functional |
43 | Verify page size selector | Options: 10, 25, 50, 100 per page | Page size options | Page size: Table updates correctly with size changes |
ADD NEW SYSTEM BUTTON VALIDATION |
|
|
|
|
44 | Verify Add New System button placement | Primary CTA button in top-right corner | N/A | UI placement: Prominent, accessible, proper styling |
45 | Check button permissions | Button visible for users with create permissions | Asset Manager role | Permission check: Button hidden for read-only users |
46 | Click Add New System button | Multi-step wizard opens (Step 1 of 3) | N/A | Navigation: Wizard modal/page opens with step indicator |
Verification Points -
Primary_Verification:
- AC01: All KPI cards display mathematically correct values using specified SQL formulas
- AC16: Export functionality generates accurate CSV files with proper formatting
- AC17: Search and filtering work across all specified columns with real-time updates
- AC15: Mobile responsive design functions properly across all breakpoints
- Secondary_Verifications:
- Navigation: All clickable elements navigate to correct destinations
- Formula Accuracy: KPI calculations match database queries exactly
- Real-time Updates: Dashboard data refreshes without page reload
- Performance: Page loads within 3 seconds, search responds within 1 second
- Permission Controls: Role-based access controls function correctly
- Negative_Verification:
- Invalid search terms return no results gracefully
- Unauthorized users cannot access restricted functions
- Broken links or missing data display appropriate error messages
- Mobile interface maintains functionality on touch devices
Test Case TC_002: Add New System - Step 1 (Basics & Location)
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_002
- Title: Verify Step 1 of System Registration Wizard - Basics & Location
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: 2025-01-18
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: Integration
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Onboarding
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 95%
- Integration_Points: GIS-Mapping, Database, Form-Validation
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX02
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Feature-Completion, Integration-Testing
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: GIS mapping service, database, facility lookup service
- Performance_Baseline: Step completion < 30 seconds
- Data_Requirements: Active facilities list, valid coordinate ranges
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: User logged in with system creation permissions
- User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager role
- Test_Data:
- Facility: "Main Treatment Plant"
- System Type: "Pumping Station"
- System Name: "Test Primary Pump Station"
- Address: "123 Water Works Drive, Springfield, IL 62701"
- Coordinates: 39.7817° N, 89.6501° W
- Prior_Test_Cases: Login and navigation to systems page
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Click "Add New System" button | Multi-step wizard opens, Step 1 active | N/A | Verify progress indicator shows 1/3 |
2 | Select facility from dropdown | Facility dropdown populates, select "Main Treatment Plant" | Facility: Main Treatment Plant | Auto-population should occur |
3 | Select system type | Dropdown shows available types | System Type: Pumping Station | Required field validation |
5 | Enter System Name | Field accepts text input | "Test Primary Pump Station" | Required field, 100 char limit |
6 | Select Status | Radio buttons for Planned/Operational | Status: Operational | Default should be "Planned" |
7 | Set Commission Date | Date picker opens, select date | Date: 2025-01-18 | Label changes based on status |
8 | Select Backup Status | Dropdown with None/Partial/Full options | Backup: None | Used for criticality calculation |
9 | Select Operational Hours | Dropdown with 24/7/Intermittent/On-Demand | Hours: 24/7 | Used for criticality calculation |
10 | Enter address in Location section | Address field accepts input | "123 Water Works Drive, Springfield, IL 62701" | Should auto-populate from facility |
11 | Click on map to set location | Map pin places, lat/long auto-fill | Click on map area | Coordinates should auto-populate |
12 | Verify latitude/longitude fields | Read-only fields show coordinates | Lat: 39.7817, Long: -89.6501 | WGS 84 format validation |
13 | Enter description | Multi-line textarea accepts input | "Primary pumping station for water distribution..." | Optional field, 500 char limit |
14 | Click "Next" button | Validation passes, advances to Step 2 | N/A | All required fields must be complete |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Step 1 completes successfully and advances to Step 2 with all data saved
- Secondary_Verifications:
- All form validations work correctly
- Map integration functions properly
- Auto-population from facility selection works
- Progress indicator updates correctly
- Negative_Verification: Cannot proceed with missing required fields, invalid coordinates rejected
Test Case TC_003: Add New System - Step 2 (Operations & Criticality)
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_003
- Title: Verify Step 2 of System Registration - Operations & Criticality Assessment
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: 2025-01-18
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Onboarding
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 7 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100%
- Integration_Points: Business-Rules-Engine, Parameter-Validation, Calculation-Engine
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX02
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Product
- Report_Categories: Business-Logic-Testing, Critical-Calculations
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Business rules engine, parameter calculation service
- Performance_Baseline: Calculation completion < 2 seconds
- Data_Requirements: Pre-configured system types, parameter templates
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Completed Step 1 successfully
- User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager role
- Test_Data:
- Design Capacity: 50 MGD
- Current Throughput: 45 MGD
- Parameters: Chlorine Residual (mg/L), pH Level, Turbidity (NTU)
- Expected Criticality Score: Medium (3.0)
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC_002 must pass
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Verify Step 2 loads with correct title | "Step 2: Operations & Criticality" displayed | N/A | Progress shows 2/3 |
2 | Enter Design Capacity | Numerical field accepts input | 50 | Unit defaults to MGD |
3 | Select capacity unit | Dropdown shows MGD, GPM, m³/hr options | MGD | Verify unit conversion |
4 | Enter Current/Average Throughput | Optional field accepts numerical input | 45 | Same unit as design capacity |
5 | Verify Monitored Parameters section | Shows empty table initially | N/A | Based on system type selection |
6 | Click "Add Parameter" button | Parameter entry row appears | N/A | Table structure validation |
7 | Add first parameter | Enter parameter name, unit, value | Chlorine Residual, mg/L, 2.0 | Verify field validation |
8 | Add second parameter | Add another parameter row | pH Level, pH, 7.2 | Multiple parameters support |
9 | Add third parameter | Add another parameter row | Turbidity, NTU, 0.15 | Remove button functionality |
10 | Remove a parameter | Click X button, parameter removed | Remove pH Level | Confirm deletion |
11 | Verify Criticality Assessment section | Shows 5 sliders with weights | N/A | Total weights = 100% |
12 | Check Impact on Water Supply slider | Pre-positioned based on Step 1 data | Expected: 5 (30% weight) | System type = Pumping Station |
13 | Check Health and Regulatory Risk | Pre-positioned based on system type | Expected: 2 (25% weight) | Pumping has indirect health risk |
14 | Check Redundancy/Backup Available | Pre-positioned based on backup status | Expected: 5 (15% weight) | Backup = None |
15 | Check Operational Dependency | Pre-positioned based on operational hours | Expected: 5 (15% weight) | Hours = 24/7 |
16 | Check Public/Customer Impact | Pre-positioned based on system type | Expected: 5 (15% weight) | Pumping directly impacts customers |
17 | Adjust slider values | Move sliders to test calculation | Adjust values as needed | Real-time calculation |
18 | Verify Final Criticality Score | Calculated score displays correctly | Expected: 3.0-4.0 (High) | Formula validation |
19 | Check score calculation | Manual calculation matches displayed | (5×0.30)+(2×0.25)+(5×0.15)+(5×0.15)+(5×0.15) = 4.0 | Business rule validation |
20 | Click "Next" button | Validation passes, proceeds to Step 3 | N/A | All data preserved |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Criticality score calculates correctly using weighted formula
- Secondary_Verifications:
- Parameter management functions correctly
- Slider pre-positioning based on Step 1 inputs
- Real-time calculation updates
- Data validation for capacity fields
- Negative_Verification: Cannot proceed without required capacity field, weights must total 100%
Test Case TC_004: Add New System - Step 3 (Docs & Contacts)
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_004
- Title: Verify Step 3 of System Registration - Documentation & Contacts
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: 2025-01-18
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Onboarding
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 4 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 90%
- Integration_Points: File-Storage, Email-Validation, Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX02
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Feature-Completion, File-Management
- Trend_Tracking: No
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: File storage service, email validation service
- Performance_Baseline: File upload < 30 seconds, form submission < 5 seconds
- Data_Requirements: Test files (PDF, JPG, DOCX), valid email formats
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Completed Steps 1 and 2 successfully
- User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager role
- Test_Data:
- Contact Person: "John Smith"
- Email: "john.smith@waterworks.com"
- Test Files: system_manual.pdf (2MB), schematic.jpg (1.5MB)
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC_002 and TC_003 must pass
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Verify Step 3 loads correctly | "Step 3: Docs & Contacts" displayed | N/A | Progress shows 3/3 |
2 | Verify Documentation section | File upload area visible | N/A | Drag-and-drop functionality |
3 | Click "Select Files" button | File browser dialog opens | N/A | Multiple file selection |
4 | Select test PDF file | File appears in upload queue | system_manual.pdf (2MB) | Progress indicator shown |
5 | Select test image file | Second file appears in queue | schematic.jpg (1.5MB) | Multiple files supported |
6 | Verify file upload progress | Upload progress bars display | N/A | Real-time progress updates |
7 | Wait for upload completion | Files show as uploaded successfully | N/A | Success indicators |
8 | Test file removal | Click remove button on one file | Remove system_manual.pdf | Confirm removal dialog |
9 | Re-upload removed file | Upload same file again | system_manual.pdf | Duplicate handling |
10 | Enter Contact Person name | Text field accepts input | "John Smith" | Required field validation |
11 | Enter Email address | Email field accepts input | "john.smith@waterworks.com" | Email format validation |
12 | Test invalid email format | Enter invalid email | "invalid-email" | Validation error display |
13 | Correct email format | Enter valid email | "john.smith@waterworks.com" | Validation passes |
14 | Verify form completion | All required fields complete | N/A | Save button enabled |
15 | Click "Save System" button | Final validation and save | N/A | System creation process |
16 | Wait for system creation | Success message and redirect | N/A | Navigate to system detail page |
17 | Verify system appears in registry | New system visible in main table | System ID: SYS-XXX | Confirm data accuracy |
18 | Check uploaded files in system | Files accessible in system details | 2 files uploaded | File metadata correct |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: System successfully created with all data from 3 steps
- Secondary_Verifications:
- File upload and management works correctly
- Email validation functions properly
- Navigation through wizard preserves data
- Success confirmation and redirect
- Negative_Verification: Cannot save with invalid email, file size limits enforced
Test Case TC_005: System Detail View - Key Stats & Quick Actions Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_005
- Title: System Detail View - Key Stats Calculations & Quick Actions Functionality
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Calculation/Navigation
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, System-Information, Key-Stats-Calculation, Quick-Actions, Navigation, Business-Rules, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Multi-Module]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 7 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 20% of System Detail View functionality
- Integration_Points: Assets Database, Facility Management, Service Orders, Schedules
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Detail
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Product
- Report_Categories: User-Experience, Calculation-Accuracy, Integration-Health
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Systems Database, Assets Database, GIS Service, Integration APIs
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds calculation refresh
- Data_Requirements: System FILT-RSF-002 with complete asset associations
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: All integration services available, System has associated assets
- User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with full system access
- Test_Data: System: FILT-RSF-002, Commission Date: 15/6/2018, 12 associated assets
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Dashboard → Asset Registry → Systems → Click detail view | System detail view loads completely | - | Breadcrumb: Dashboard > Assets > Main Plant Rapid Sand Filtration |
2 | Verify System Information Header section | All system details display correctly in header block | System ID: FILT-RSF-002, Name: Main Plant Rapid Sand Filtration | Data Source: Systems table (Primary Key) |
3 | Verify System Type field | Shows correct functional classification | System Type: Filtration System | Data Source: Systems table |
4 | Verify Commission Date | Date format DD/MM/YYYY | Commission Date: 15/6/2018 | Data Source: Systems table |
5 | Verify Location field | Geographic district/area displayed | Location: North District | Data Source: Systems table |
6 | Verify Contact Person | Primary point of contact name | Contact Person: John Smith | Data Source: Systems table |
7 | Verify Contact Phone | Phone number with proper format | Contact: +91 98765 43210 | Data Source: Systems table |
8 | Verify Status field | Current real-time operational status | Status: Operational | Data Source: Systems table (updated by service orders) |
9 | Click "View on map" link | GIS Integration: Modal window opens displaying system location on GIS map | Navigation: Opens map modal with Lat/Long coordinates | Integration: Leaflet/ArcGIS, Data Source: Systems table (Latitude/Longitude) |
10 | Verify map modal content | Map displays precise system location with pin marker | Business Rule: Uses stored Lat/Long coordinates | Close modal after verification |
11 | Verify Description field | Detailed text description of system purpose | Description: "Primary rapid sand filtration system for municipal water treatment plant serving the central district. Designed for continuous operation with automated backwash cycles." | Data Source: Systems table |
12 | Navigation: Scroll to Key Stats section in right sidebar | Key Stats section visible with 4 metric | Visual Verification: Age, Condition Score, Risk Score, Efficiency | Right sidebar positioning |
13 | Verify Age calculation | Formula: DATEDIFF(CURRENT_DATE, '2018-06-15', YEAR) = 7 years | Age: 7 years | Tooltip: "System Age - The total time the system has been in service since its commission date." |
14 | Verify Condition Score calculation | Formula: Weighted average: SUM(asset_condition_score × asset_weight) / SUM(asset_weight) WHERE system_id='FILT-RSF-002' = 85 | Condition Score: 85 Good | Business Rule: >80=Good, 60-80=Fair, <60=Poor |
15 | Verify Risk Score calculation | Formula: Final calculated score from "Criticality Assessment" = 63 | Risk Score: 63 Fair | Data Source: From system setup criticality assessment |
16 | Verify Efficiency calculation | Formula: (Actual_Output/Energy_Consumed)/(Design_Output/Design_Energy) × 100 = 99% | Efficiency: 99% | Tooltip: "Operational Efficiency - A measure of the system's performance, comparing its actual output to its energy or resource consumption against design standards." |
17 | Navigation: Scroll to Quick Actions section in right sidebar | Quick Actions section with 3 action buttons visible | Visual Verification: Edit Facility, Create Service Order, Schedule Inspection buttons | Below Key Stats section |
18 | verify "Edit Facility" button state | Business Rule: Button enabled if system has parent facility association | Button: Enabled (system has parent facility) | Navigation Target: Parent facility edit page |
19 | Click "Edit Facility" button | Navigation: Redirects to facility edit page | - | Business Rule: Pre-populated with parent facility data |
20 | Navigation: Browser back button → Return to system detail view | Return to FILT-RSF-002 system detail page | - | Navigation history maintained |
21 | Click "Create Service Order" button | Navigation: Opens service order creation form | - | Business Rule: Form pre-populated with System ID = FILT-RSF-002 |
22 | Verify service order form pre-population | System ID field auto-filled, non-editable | Pre-populated Field: System ID = FILT-RSF-002 | Tooltip: "Create Service Order - Create a new work order (e.g., for corrective maintenance) for this system." |
23 | Navigation: Cancel service order → Return to system detail | Return to system detail view without creating order | - | Cancel button or browser back |
24 | Click "Schedule Inspection" button | Navigation: Opens Create Schedule wizard | - | Business Rule: Pre-configured for "Inspection" type, system pre-associated |
25 | Verify schedule wizard pre-configuration | Schedule type = "Inspection", System = FILT-RSF-002 | Pre-configured Fields: Type=Inspection, System=FILT-RSF-002 | Tooltip: "Schedule Inspection - Set up a new recurring inspection schedule for this system." |
26 | Navigation: Cancel schedule creation → Return to system detail | Return to system detail view | - | Verify all data persisted correctly |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: All calculated fields use correct formulas and display accurate values
- Secondary_Verifications: Quick Actions navigate properly, GIS integration functional, Business rules applied
- Negative_Verification: Edit Facility disabled if no parent facility, Phone/email format validation, Map loading errors handled
Test Case TC_006: Key Metrics Cards - Real-time Calculations & Navigation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_006
- Title: Key Metrics Cards - Capacity, Performance, Alerts & Assets Validation
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Calculation/Real-time
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke/Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Real-Time-KPI, Capacity-Calculation, Performance-Metrics, Alert-Management, Asset-Count, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Telemetry]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 30% of System Monitoring functionality
- Integration_Points: Telemetry API, Alerts System, Assets Database, Performance Engine
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Metrics
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Operations
- Report_Categories: Real-Time-Monitoring, Performance-Dashboard, Alert-Management
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Telemetry Service, Alerts API, Assets Database, Performance Calculator
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second real-time updates
- Data_Requirements: System with active telemetry, 2 critical alerts, 12 assets
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Real-time data streaming, Alert system active, Asset associations complete
- User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager or Plant Supervisor with monitoring access
- Test_Data: Current Throughput: 45.2 MLD, Design Capacity: 50 MLD, 2 active critical alerts
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, real-time data available
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Detail view>> key metrics>> Verify Current Capacity card value | Formula: Current_Throughput / Design_Capacity = 45.2 / 50 MLD | Value Display: "45.2 / 50 MLD" | Real-time throughput data |
2 | Verify Capacity utilization percentage | Formula: (Current_Throughput / Design_Capacity) × 100 = (45.2/50) × 100 = 90.4% | Progress Bar: 90.4% utilized | Visual progress indicator |
3 | Verify Capacity progress bar visual | Progress bar fills to 90.4% of total width | Visual Validation: ~90% fill with blue color | Proportional visual representation |
4 | Verify Operational Performance score | Formula: Composite index from uptime, efficiency, adherence to setpoints = 87 | Performance Score: 87 | Score range 0-100 |
5 | Verify Performance qualitative rating | Business Rule: Score >85 = "Excellent", 70-85 = "Good", 50-70 = "Fair", <50 = "Poor" | Rating: "Excellent" | Derived from score threshold |
6 | Verify Critical Alerts count | Formula: COUNT(Alert_ID) WHERE System_ID='FILT-RSF-002' AND Status='Active' AND Priority IN ('High','Critical') = 2 | Alert Count: 2 | Active high-priority alerts |
7 | Verify Critical Alerts action text | Sub-text indicates required action | Action Text: "Monitor" | Indicates monitoring needed |
8 | Verify Assets count | Formula: COUNT(Asset_ID) WHERE Parent_System_ID='FILT-RSF-002' = 12 | Asset Count: 12 | Total associated assets |
9 | Verify real-time data refresh | Data updates automatically without page refresh | Real-time Validation: Values update within 30 seconds | Live data streaming |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: All KPI calculations use correct formulas and display real-time accurate values
- Secondary_Verifications: Progress bars visually accurate, Navigation links functional, Tooltips informative
- Negative_Verification: Handle missing telemetry data gracefully, Alert count reflects only active alerts, Asset count excludes decommissioned assets
Test Case TC_007: System Performance KPI Cards - Complete Formula Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_007
- Title: System Performance Overview - 10 KPI Cards Formula Validation from Screenshot
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Calculation/KPI Validation
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke/Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, KPI-Grid-Validation, System-Performance, Formula-Accuracy, Real-Time-Data, Trend-Analysis, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Performance-Engine]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of System Performance KPI Grid
- Integration_Points: Performance API, Asset Database, Health Monitor, Risk Calculator, Inspection System
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Performance-KPI
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Operations
- Report_Categories: Performance-Dashboard, KPI-Accuracy, System-Health
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Performance Calculator, Asset Database, Health Engine, Risk Calculator, Inspection System
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds KPI grid load
- Data_Requirements: System FILT-RSF-002 with complete performance data
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: All monitoring services active, Real-time data available
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with performance dashboard access
- Test_Data: System with 12 assets, performance metrics, inspection records
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, Performance tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: System Detail → Performance Tab → System Performance Overview | Complete KPI grid displays with 10 cards | Layout: 4-4-2 card arrangement | Performance overview section |
2 | Card 1: System Health Index Verify calculation | Formula: SUM(Asset_Condition_Score × Asset_Weight) / SUM(Asset_Weight) WHERE Parent_System_ID = 'FILT-RSF-002' = 89.2 | System Health Index: 89.2, Trend: +3.2% from last month | Blue line chart icon, upward trend |
3 | Hover over System Health Index | Tooltip: "System Health Index - A consolidated score (0–100) indicating overall health of this system, combining asset condition, risk, and operational performance." | Tooltip displays correctly | System-specific description |
4 | Card 2: System Availability Verify calculation | Formula: ((SUM(scheduled_operating_time) - SUM(unplanned_downtime)) / SUM(scheduled_operating_time)) × 100 WHERE Parent_System_ID = 'FILT-RSF-002' = 97.8% | System Availability: 97.8%, Trend: -0.6% from last month | Green circular progress icon |
5 | Hover over System Availability | Tooltip: "System Availability - Percentage of time assets were available to perform required functions during the selected period." | Tooltip displays correctly | Availability definition |
6 | Card 3: Out of Service Assets Verify count | Formula: COUNT(asset_id) WHERE parent_system_id = 'FILT-RSF-002' AND status = 'Out of Service' = 2 | Out of Service Assets: 2, Count display | Orange warning triangle icon |
7 | Verify Out of Service percentage | Formula: (COUNT(out_of_service) / COUNT(total_assets)) × 100 WHERE parent_system_id = 'FILT-RSF-002' = (2/12) × 100 = 16.7% | Out of Service: 2 (16.7%), Trend: +1 from last month | Percentage calculation |
8 | Hover over Out of Service Assets | Tooltip: "Out of Service Assets - Total number and percentage of assets currently inactive or not operational within this system." | Tooltip displays correctly | System-specific context |
9 | Card 4: Avg RUL System Assets Verify calculation | Formula: SUM(remaining_useful_life) / COUNT(asset_id) WHERE parent_system_id = 'FILT-RSF-002' = 8.3 years | Avg RUL System Assets: 8.3 yrs, Trend: +0.5 yrs from last quarter | Purple calendar icon |
10 | Hover over Avg RUL | Tooltip: "Average Remaining Life - Average years remaining before assets reach end of service life." | Tooltip displays correctly | Asset lifecycle context |
11 | Card 5: Total Assets in System Verify count | Formula: COUNT(asset_id) WHERE parent_system_id = 'FILT-RSF-002' = 12 | Total Assets in System: 12, Change: No change | Gray gear icon |
12 | Hover over Total Assets | Tooltip: "Total Assets in System - The total number of individual assets (e.g., pumps, valves, filters) that make up this system." | Tooltip displays correctly | Asset inventory context |
13 | Card 6: Inspection Compliance Verify calculation | Formula: (COUNT(completed_inspections) / COUNT(scheduled_inspections)) × 100 WHERE system_id = 'FILT-RSF-002' = 88.9% | Inspection Compliance: 88.9%, Trend: +2.1% monthly variance | Green upward arrow icon |
14 | Hover over Inspection Compliance | Tooltip: "Inspection Compliance - Percentage of required inspections completed by their due date for this system and its assets." | Tooltip displays correctly | System-specific compliance |
15 | Card 7: Overall Risk Score Verify calculation | Formula: SUM(asset_risk_score × criticality_weight) / SUM(criticality_weight) WHERE parent_system_id = 'FILT-RSF-002' = 63 | Overall Risk Score: 63, Trend: -1.5% monthly variance | Yellow warning shield icon |
16 | Verify Risk Score classification | Business Rule: 0–30 = Low, 31–70 = Medium, 71–100 = High | Risk Level: Medium (63 falls in 31-70 range) | Risk classification logic |
17 | Hover over Overall Risk Score | Tooltip: "Overall Risk Score - Aggregated risk score combining probability and consequence of failure for all assets. Lower score indicates lower risk." | Tooltip displays correctly | Risk assessment context |
18 | Card 8: Service Level Achievement Verify calculation | Formula: (SUM(sla_compliant_time) / SUM(total_operational_time)) × 100 WHERE system_id = 'FILT-RSF-002' = 94.5% | Service Level Achievement: 94.5%, Trend: +2.8% monthly variance | Green checkmark icon |
19 | Hover over Service Level Achievement | Tooltip: "Service Level Achievement - Percentage of time operational service levels (pressure, flow, quality) were achieved by this system." | Tooltip displays correctly | System SLA context |
20 | Card 9: Portfolio Failure Rate Verify calculation | Formula: (COUNT(failed_assets) / COUNT(total_assets)) × 100 WHERE parent_system_id = 'FILT-RSF-002' = 4.2% | Portfolio Failure Rate: 4.2%, Trend: -0.6% monthly variance | Green triangle up icon |
21 | Hover over Portfolio Failure Rate | Tooltip: "Portfolio Failure Rate - The percentage of assets within this system that have recorded a failure in the current period." | Tooltip displays correctly | Failure rate context |
22 | Card 10: Average MTBF Verify calculation | Formula: AVG(mean_time_between_failures) WHERE parent_system_id = 'FILT-RSF-002' = 2,847 hrs | Average MTBF: 2,847 hrs, Trend: +3.2% monthly variance | Clock icon with upward trend |
23 | Hover over Average MTBF | Tooltip: "Average Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF) - The average time that passes between one failure and the next for the assets in this system. A higher number is better." | Tooltip displays correctly | Reliability metric context |
24 | Trend Validation: Verify all trend calculations | Formula: ((Current_Value - Previous_Value) / Previous_Value) × 100 for each KPI | All trends display correct percentage and direction | Trend calculation accuracy |
25 | Visual Validation: Verify card layout and icons | 4-4-2 grid layout, appropriate icons for each metric | Layout matches screenshot exactly | UI/UX consistency |
26 | Color Coding Validation: Verify status colors | Good metrics = Green, Warning = Orange, Critical = Red | Color coding reflects performance status | Visual status indicators |
27 | Real-time Update: Verify data refresh | KPI values update automatically without page refresh | Values refresh within 30 seconds | Live data integration |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: All 10 KPI cards display correct values using system-specific formulas
- Secondary_Verifications: Tooltips accurate and system-specific, Trend calculations correct, Visual layout matches requirements
- Negative_Verification: System calculations exclude other systems' data, Handle missing data gracefully, Percentage calculations stay within bounds
Test Case TC_008: Energy Consumption Section - Complete Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_008
- Title: Energy Consumption Section - Efficiency, Cost, Upload & History Validation
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Energy Management/File Upload
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Energy-Management, Efficiency-Calculation, Cost-Management, File-Upload, OCR-Processing, Energy-History, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Energy-Systems]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Energy Management functionality
- Integration_Points: Energy Management API, OCR Service, File Storage, Cost Calculator
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Energy
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Operations/Engineering
- Report_Categories: Energy-Efficiency, Cost-Management, Operational-Excellence
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Energy Management System, OCR Service, File Storage, Cost Calculator
- Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds file upload, < 2 seconds calculation
- Data_Requirements: System with energy consumption data, test PDF files
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Energy monitoring active, OCR service available, File storage configured
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with energy management access
- Test_Data: Energy readings, electricity bill PDF, cost rates
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, Performance tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Performance Tab → Energy Consumption Section | Energy section displays with 2 KPI cards and 3 action buttons | Energy Efficiency & Monthly Energy Cost cards visible | Below performance KPIs |
2 | Energy Efficiency: Verify calculation | Formula: Total_Output_ML / Total_Energy_Consumed_kWh = 285 kWh/ML | Energy Efficiency: 285 kWh/ML, Trend: -12 kWh/ML vs last month | Tooltip: "Energy Efficiency - A measure of the system's efficiency, showing how much output (e.g., Million Liters) is produced per kilowatt-hour of energy consumed." |
3 | Monthly Energy Cost: Verify calculation | Formula: Total_Consumption_kWh × Cost_per_kWh = $18,650 | Monthly Energy Cost: $18,650, Trend: -8.2% vs budget | Tooltip: "Monthly Energy Cost - The estimated total cost of energy consumed by this system in the current period." |
4 | Click "Upload Bill" button | File Upload Dialog: Browser file picker opens | Business Rule: PDF upload with OCR processing | Tooltip: "Upload Bill - Upload a PDF of the electricity bill for this system for automated data entry and record-keeping." |
5 | Upload electricity bill PDF | OCR Processing: System extracts consumption and cost data automatically | Test File: electricity_bill_june2025.pdf (2MB) | Business Rule: OCR parses total consumption and cost or prompts manual entry |
6 | Click "Enter Reading" button | Manual Entry Modal: Meter reading input form opens | Business Rule: Manual meter reading entry | Tooltip: "Enter Meter Reading - Manually enter a new reading from the energy meter for this system." |
7 | Enter new meter reading | Auto-Calculation: System calculates consumption since last reading | Previous: 45,680 kWh, Current: 46,920 kWh | Business Rule: Auto-calculates consumption = Current - Previous |
8 | Click "Add Reading" to save | KPI Update: Energy Efficiency and Monthly Cost recalculate automatically | Updates consumption: 1,240 kWh, Updates cost | Business Rule: Updates Energy Efficiency and Monthly Energy Cost KPIs |
9 | Click "View History" link | History Modal: Chronological table of all past energy readings opens | Business Rule: Modal with complete energy history | Tooltip: "View History - View a complete history of all past energy meter readings and calculated costs for this system." |
10 | Verify History table structure | Required Columns: Date, Previous Reading (kWh), Current Reading (kWh), Consumption (kWh), Cost | Business Rule: Table includes all specified columns | Complete audit trail of energy data |
Here are the comprehensive verification points for TC_008:
Verification Points
Primary_Verification
- Energy Efficiency calculation accuracy: Formula
Total_Output_ML / Total_Energy_Consumed_kWh
produces expected result of 285 kWh/ML - Monthly Energy Cost calculation accuracy: Formula
Total_Consumption_kWh × Cost_per_kWh
produces expected result of $18,650 - OCR processing functionality: PDF upload successfully extracts consumption and cost data automatically
- Manual reading auto-calculation: System correctly calculates consumption as
Current_Reading - Previous_Reading
(46,920 - 45,680 = 1,240 kWh) - KPI real-time updates: Energy Efficiency and Monthly Cost recalculate automatically after new reading entry
Secondary_Verifications
Negative_Verification
Test Case TC_009: Compliance & Water Quality Section - Parameter Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_018
- Title: Water Quality Parameter Cards - Real-time Value & Compliance Status Validation
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Compliance/Real-time Monitoring
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke/Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Water-Quality-Parameters, Real-Time-Compliance, Parameter-Cards, Status-Validation, Regulatory-Standards, Color-Coding, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Compliance, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Lab-Systems]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 12 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Water Quality Parameter Cards functionality
- Integration_Points: Lab Data API, Regulatory Database, Real-time Monitoring, Alert System
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-WaterQuality
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: CSM/Compliance Officer
- Report_Categories: Regulatory-Compliance, Water-Quality-Monitoring, Violation-Management
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: Critical
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Lab Data Service, Regulatory Standards Database, Real-time Data Stream
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds parameter refresh
- Data_Requirements: Real-time water quality readings, regulatory compliance limits
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Lab data integration active, Regulatory standards database updated, Real-time monitoring enabled
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with water quality monitoring access
- Test_Data: Current parameter readings, regulatory limits, test scenarios for all status types
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, Performance tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Performance Tab → Compliance & Water Quality Section | Water quality parameter cards grid displays | Multiple parameter cards visible in grid layout | Real-time compliance monitoring section |
2 | Turbidity Parameter Card: Verify structure | Value: 0.12 NTU, Target/Limit: <0.3 NTU, Status Tag: "Within Limits" (Green) | Business Rule: Green status when value within target range | Tooltip: "Turbidity - The most recent measurement for this water quality parameter compared against its regulatory compliance target." |
3 | Hover over Turbidity card | Tooltip Display: Parameter name and description appear | Tooltip Text: "Turbidity - The most recent measurement for this water quality parameter compared against its regulatory compliance target." | Interactive help information |
4 | Chlorine Residual Card: Verify compliance status | Value: 1.8 mg/L, Target/Limit: 1.0-2.0 mg/L, Status Tag: "Within Limits" (Green) | Business Rule: Status determined by comparing Value to Target | Color-coded compliance indicator |
5 | pH Level Card: Verify parameter display | Value: 7.2, Target/Limit: 6.5-8.5, Status Tag: "Within Limits" (Green) | Business Rule: Green=Within Limits, Yellow=Warning, Red=Exceeded | Regulatory compliance validation |
6 | Temperature Card: Verify within limits | Value: 18.5°C, Target/Limit: Seasonal average, Status Tag: "Normal" (Green) | Business Rule: Normal operational parameter | Environmental parameter tracking |
7 | Total Coliforms Card: Verify compliance | Value: 0 CFU/100ml, Target/Limit: Required: 0 CFU/100ml, Status Tag: "Compliant" (Green) | Business Rule: Zero tolerance parameter compliance | Critical health parameter |
8 | Water Hardness Card: Verify moderate status | Value: 125 mg/L CaCO3, Target/Limit: Moderate hardness, Status Tag: "Moderate" (Yellow) | Business Rule: Yellow status for parameters within acceptable but not optimal range | Water quality classification |
9 | Warning Status Test: Create parameter approaching limit | Simulate parameter value near upper/lower boundary | Value: 2.8 NTU (approaching 3.0 limit), Status: "Warning" (Yellow) | Business Rule: Yellow status for values approaching limits |
10 | Verify Warning status calculation | Status Logic: Value within 10% of limit triggers warning | Formula: IF (Value >= Target*0.9 AND Value < Target) THEN "Warning" | Early warning threshold calculation |
11 | Exceeded Status Test: Create parameter violation | Simulate parameter exceeding regulatory limit | Value: 3.2 NTU (exceeding 3.0 limit), Status: "Exceeded" (Red) | Business Rule: Red status for values outside acceptable range |
12 | Verify Exceeded status calculation | Status Logic: Value above target triggers exceeded status | Formula: IF (Value > Target) THEN "Exceeded" | Compliance violation detection |
13 | Parameter Card Layout: Verify consistent structure | All cards display: Parameter Name, Current Value, Target/Limit, Status Tag | Visual Validation: Consistent card layout and information display | UI consistency verification |
14 | Real-time Update Test: Verify data refresh | Parameter values update automatically without page refresh | Real-time Validation: Values refresh within 30 seconds | Live data integration |
15 | Multiple Parameter Status: Verify mixed compliance | Display scenario with mix of compliant and non-compliant parameters | Test Scenario: 3 Green, 2 Yellow, 1 Red status cards | Comprehensive status validation |
16 | Status Color Validation: Verify color coding consistency | Green: Within Limits/Compliant, Yellow: Warning/Moderate, Red: Exceeded/Critical | Visual Validation: Consistent color scheme across all cards | Color accessibility compliance |
17 | Tooltip Consistency: Verify all parameter tooltips | Each parameter card displays contextual tooltip on hover | Tooltip Format: "[Parameter Name] - The most recent measurement for this water quality parameter compared against its regulatory compliance target." | Interactive help validation |
18 | Parameter Value Precision: Verify decimal places | Values display appropriate precision for each parameter type | Precision Rules: Turbidity (2 decimals), pH (1 decimal), Integers for counts | Data display accuracy |
19 | Target Range Display: Verify limit formatting | Target/Limit shows appropriate format for each parameter | Format Examples: "<0.3 NTU", "1.0-2.0 mg/L", "6.5-8.5", "0 CFU/100ml" | Regulatory limit presentation |
20 | Status Tag Positioning: Verify visual hierarchy | Status tag prominently displayed and easily readable | Visual Validation: Status tag visible, appropriate size and contrast | User experience optimization |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Parameter values accurate, Status logic correct based on value vs target comparison, Color coding appropriate
- Secondary_Verifications: Real-time updates functional, Tooltips contextual and consistent, Visual layout professional
- Negative_Verification: Violation detection accurate, Missing data handled gracefully, Invalid readings flagged appropriately
Test Case TC_010: Asset Health & Work Management Section - Complete Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_010
- Title: Asset Health & Work Management - Distribution Charts & Work Orders
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
Test Type: Functional/Asset Management/Work Order Integration
Test Level: System
Priority: P2-High
Execution Phase: Regression
Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Asset-Health-Distribution, Work-Order-Management, Interactive-Charts, Asset-Analytics, Maintenance-Planning, MOD-Systems, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Asset-Management, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Work-Management]
Business Context
Customer_Segment: Enterprise
Revenue_Impact: Medium
Business_Priority: Should-Have
Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
Compliance_Required: No
SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
Risk_Level: Medium
Complexity_Level: High
Expected_Execution_Time: 12 minutes
Reproducibility_Score: High
Data_Sensitivity: Medium
Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
Feature_Coverage: 100% of Asset Health & Work Management functionality
Integration_Points: Asset Database, Work Order System, Chart Engine, Navigation System
Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-AssetHealth
Requirement_Coverage: Complete
Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Maintenance
Report_Categories: Asset-Health, Work-Management, Maintenance-Planning
Trend_Tracking: Yes
Executive_Visibility: No
Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Related_Requirements: Asset Health Monitoring, Work Order Integration, Chart Interactions
Related_Bugs: N/A
Related_Test_Cases: TC_008, TC_015
Test Environment
Environment: Staging
Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
Device/OS: Windows 10/11
Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
Dependencies: Asset Database, Work Order System, Chart Rendering Engine
Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds chart rendering
Data_Requirements: Asset health data, work orders, failure history
Prerequisites
Setup_Requirements: Asset data complete, Work order system active, Chart engine functional
User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with asset management access
Test_Data: 12 assets with health scores, active work orders, failure records
Prior_Test_Cases: Asset associations verified, work order system functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Performance Tab → Asset Health & Work Management Section | Asset health charts and work order lists display | 4 subsections: Health Distribution, Age Profile, Work Orders, Frequent Failures | Asset management overview |
2 | Asset Health Status Distribution: Verify chart | Formula: COUNT(Assets) for each condition (Good, Fair, Poor), Percentage: (Count / Total_Assets) × 100 | Good: 8 (66.7%), Fair: 3 (25.0%), Poor: 1 (8.3%) | Tooltip: "Asset Health Distribution - A breakdown of the assets in this system by their current physical condition score." |
3 | Click on "Poor Condition" bar | Navigation: Filters Assets tab to show only poor condition assets | Business Rule: Clicking bar filters Assets tab by condition | Interactive chart navigation |
4 | Asset Age Profile: Verify age distribution | Formula: COUNT(Assets) for each age bracket (0-5 yrs, 5-10 yrs, 10-20 yrs, >20 yrs) | 0-5 years: 4, 5-10 years: 6, 10-20 years: 2, >20 years: 0 | Tooltip: "Asset Age Profile - A breakdown of the assets in this system by their age, helping to identify upcoming replacement needs." |
5 | Click on ">20 years" bar | Navigation: Filters Assets tab to show only assets in that age bracket | Business Rule: Clicking bar filters Assets tab by age range | Age-based asset filtering |
6 | Active Work Orders: Verify work order list | Display: Work Order Name, ID, Assigned To, sorted by priority | Replace filter media (WO-2024-001, John Smith), Calibrate sensors (WO-2024-002, Sarah Johnson) | Tooltip: "Active Work Orders - A list of the most important maintenance tasks currently in progress or scheduled for this system." |
7 | Click "View" button on work order | Navigation: Redirects to detailed work order page | Business Rule: View button navigates to work order details | Work order management integration |
8 | Frequent Failure Assets: Verify failure ranking | Display: Asset Name, ID, Failure Count, sorted by failure frequency | Primary Pump (P-001, 3 failures), Flow Sensor (S-005, 2 failures) | Tooltip: "Frequent Failure Assets - The 'worst-acting' assets in this system, ranked by the number of failures. These may be candidates for overhaul or replacement." |
9 | Click "Inspect" button | Action: Creates new inspection work order for that asset | Business Rule: Inspect button creates inspection work order | Proactive maintenance workflow |
10 | Click "Review" button | Navigation: Redirects to asset's detailed profile page | Business Rule: Review button navigates to asset details | Asset management integration |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: All formulas calculate correctly, Charts display accurate data, Navigation functions work properly
- Secondary_Verifications: Color coding accurate, Tooltips contextual, Interactive elements functional
- Negative_Verification: Handle missing data gracefully, File upload validation, Status calculations robust
Test Case TC_011: Active Alerts Section - Critical Assets & Anomalies
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_011
- Title: Active Alerts - Critical Assets Out of Service & Anomalies Widget Validation
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Real-time Alerts/SCADA Integration
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke/Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Active-Alerts, Critical-Assets, Anomaly-Detection, Real-Time-Monitoring, SCADA-Integration, Work-Order-Creation, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Alert-Management, Platform-Web, Report-Operations, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-CMMS]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Active Alerts functionality
- Integration_Points: Assets Database, SCADA System, CMMS, Anomaly Detection Engine
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Alerts
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Operations/Maintenance
- Report_Categories: Alert-Management, Asset-Monitoring, Anomaly-Detection
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: Critical
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Assets Database, SCADA System, CMMS, Anomaly Detection Service
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds alert refresh
- Data_Requirements: Assets with out-of-service status, real-time anomaly data
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: SCADA integration active, Asset monitoring enabled, CMMS connected
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with alert management access
- Test_Data: Assets with "Out of Service" status, real-time anomaly alerts
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, Alerts tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: System Detail → Alerts Tab → Active Alerts Section | Active alerts section displays with 2 main widgets | Critical Assets Out of Service & Anomalies widgets visible | Real-time alert monitoring |
2 | Critical Assets Widget: Verify data source | Query: Assets table filtered by System_ID where Asset_Status = 'Out of Service' OR 'Failure' | Widget displays assets currently non-operational | Real-time asset status monitoring |
3 | Asset Name & ID: Verify display format | Asset Name & ID: "Secondary Pump P-003" | Business Rule: Shows common name and unique identifier | Tooltip: "Asset Details - The specific asset that is currently out of service." |
4 | Status/Reason: Verify current status | Status/Reason: "Under Repair", "Parts Ordered", "Awaiting Technician" | Business Rule: Brief note on current repair status | Tooltip: "Current Status - The latest update on the repair or recovery status of this asset." |
5 | ETA Field: Verify estimated return | ETA: "2025-08-25" or "Parts ETA: 2025-08-23" | Business Rule: Estimated date for return to service | Tooltip: "Estimated Return to Service - The estimated date this asset is expected to be operational again." |
6 | Click "Prioritize" button | CMMS Integration: Work order priority escalated from 'High' to 'Critical' | Business Rule: Increases priority and triggers notifications | Tooltip: "Prioritize Repair - Click to escalate the priority of the repair work order for this asset." |
7 | Anomalies Widget: Verify data source | Query: Real-time feed from Anomalies/System_Alerts table filtered by System_ID | Widget displays real-time operational anomalies | SCADA/IIoT system integration |
8 | Anomaly Asset: Verify source identification | Asset Name & ID: "Motor M-007" | Business Rule: Asset where anomaly detected | Tooltip: "Anomaly Source - The specific asset or sensor reporting an anomalous reading." |
9 | Anomaly Description: Verify issue details | Description: "Vibration levels high", "Temperature spike detected" | Business Rule: Concise description of detected issue | Tooltip: "Anomaly Details - A description of the deviation from normal operating parameters." |
10 | Timestamp: Verify detection time | Timestamp: "1 min ago", "12 min ago" | Business Rule: Time elapsed since anomaly detection | Tooltip: "Detection Time - The time that has elapsed since this anomaly was first detected." |
11 | Click "view" button | Work Order Creation: Opens "Create Service Order" form pre-populated with anomaly details | Business Rule: Pre-populates form with anomaly and asset information | Tooltip: "Investigate Anomaly - Click to create an inspection work order to investigate the root cause of this anomaly." |
12 | Real-time Updates: Verify alert refresh | New anomalies appear automatically, resolved anomalies removed | Real-time Validation: Updates within 30 seconds | Live SCADA integration |
13 | Multiple Assets: Verify list handling | Multiple out-of-service assets displayed in scrollable list | Business Rule: All qualifying assets shown | Comprehensive asset monitoring |
14 | Priority Escalation: Verify notification trigger | Maintenance team receives notification after priority escalation | Integration Test: CMMS notification system | Workflow automation |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Real-time data accurate, Work order integration functional, Priority escalation working
- Secondary_Verifications: Tooltips contextual, Timestamps accurate, Asset information complete
- Negative_Verification: Handle missing data gracefully, Failed integrations managed, Invalid alerts filtered
Test Case TC_012: Maintenance & Workload Overview - KPI Cards Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_012
- Title: Maintenance & Workload Overview - Emergency Work Orders & SLA Tracking
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/KPI Calculation/Workload Management
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Maintenance-KPI, Work-Order-Tracking, SLA-Monitoring, Resource-Management, Backlog-Analysis, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Workload-Management, Platform-Web, Report-Operations, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-CMMS]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Maintenance & Workload KPI functionality
- Integration_Points: CMMS, SLA Monitor, Resource Management, Scheduling System
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Maintenance
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Operations/Maintenance Management
- Report_Categories: Workload-Management, SLA-Compliance, Resource-Optimization
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: CMMS, SLA Database, Resource Management System
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds KPI calculation
- Data_Requirements: Work orders, SLA data, resource allocation information
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: CMMS integration active, SLA monitoring enabled, Work order data available
- User_Roles_Permissions: Maintenance Manager with workload management access
- Test_Data: Emergency work orders, SLA breach records, overdue tasks
- Prior_Test_Cases: Alerts tab accessible, KPI calculation engine functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Alerts Tab → Maintenance & Workload Overview Section | KPI cards section displays with 4 main cards | Emergency Work Orders, SLA Breaches, Overdue Tasks, Work Order Backlog | Workload monitoring dashboard |
2 | Emergency Work Orders: Verify count calculation | Formula: COUNT(SO_ID) WHERE System_ID = 'FILT-RSF-002' AND Priority = 'Emergency' AND Status != 'Completed' = 7 | Emergency Work Orders: 7, Action: "Assign Resources" | Tooltip: "Emergency Work Orders - The number of open work orders that require immediate attention to prevent or resolve a critical failure." |
3 | Click "Assign Resources" button | Navigation: Opens resource allocation view filtered for emergency work orders | Business Rule: Shows only emergency work orders for resource assignment | Resource management integration |
4 | SLA Breaches: Verify breach count | Formula: COUNT(SLA_Breach_ID) WHERE System_ID = 'FILT-RSF-002' AND Period = 'Current' = 3 | SLA Breaches: 3, Action: "Escalate" | Tooltip: "SLA Breaches - The number of times this system has operated outside of its defined service level targets in the current period." |
5 | Click "Escalate" button | Notification Workflow: Triggers notifications to management and compliance teams | Business Rule: Escalates SLA violations for management attention | Compliance workflow automation |
6 | Overdue Tasks: Verify overdue calculation | Formula: COUNT(SO_ID) WHERE System_ID = 'FILT-RSF-002' AND Due_Date < Current_Date AND Status != 'Completed' = 12 | Overdue Tasks: 12, Action: "View Details" | Tooltip: "Overdue Tasks - The number of scheduled work orders for this system that have not been completed by their due date." |
7 | Click "View Details" button | Navigation: Opens O&M tab pre-filtered to show overdue work orders | Business Rule: Filters to show only overdue tasks | Task management integration |
8 | Work Order Backlog: Verify hours calculation | Formula: SUM(Estimated_Hours) WHERE System_ID = 'FILT-RSF-002' AND Priority != 'Emergency' AND Status = 'Open' = 156 hrs | Work Order Backlog: 24 (Est. 156 hours), Action: "Optimize Schedule" | Tooltip: "Work Order Backlog - The total estimated labor hours required to complete all currently open work orders for this system." |
9 | Click "Optimize Schedule" button | Navigation: Opens scheduling tool for backlog management | Business Rule: Shows scheduling interface for workload optimization | Schedule optimization tool |
10 | KPI Refresh: Verify real-time updates | KPI values update automatically as work orders are completed/created | Real-time Validation: Values refresh within 60 seconds | Live data integration |
11 | Visual Indicators: Verify alert levels | High numbers display with warning colors (red/orange) | Visual Validation: Color coding reflects urgency levels | User experience optimization |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: All KPI calculations accurate, Action buttons functional, Navigation working
- Secondary_Verifications: Real-time updates functioning, Visual indicators appropriate, Tooltips informative
- Negative_Verification: Handle zero values gracefully, Invalid data filtered, Failed integrations managed
Test Case TC_013: Proactive & Financial Alerts - Predictive Maintenance
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_013
- Title: Proactive & Financial Alerts - High Cost Assets & Predictive Maintenance
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Predictive Analytics/Cost Management
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Predictive-Maintenance, Cost-Analysis, Financial-Alerts, Analytics-Engine, Proactive-Management, MOD-Systems, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Predictive-Analytics, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Analytics]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Proactive & Financial Alerts functionality
- Integration_Points: Analytics Engine, Cost Database, Work Order System, Asset Management
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Alerts-Predictive
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Finance
- Report_Categories: Predictive-Analytics, Cost-Management, Proactive-Maintenance
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Analytics Engine, Cost Database, Work Order System, Asset Database
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds analytics load
- Data_Requirements: Asset cost data, predictive analytics models, historical maintenance data
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Analytics engine active, Cost data available, Predictive models trained
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with financial alerts access
- Test_Data: Assets with maintenance costs, predictive maintenance alerts, confidence levels
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, Alerts tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Alerts Tab → Proactive & Financial Alerts Section | Section displays with 2 main widgets | High Maintenance Cost Assets & Predictive Maintenance Alerts | Forward-looking alert management |
2 | High Maintenance Cost Assets: Verify cost ranking | Display: Top 3-5 assets with highest maintenance costs | Primary Treatment Pump (P-002, $8,450 Monthly), Advanced Filter System (F-005, $6,280 Monthly) | Tooltip: "High Maintenance Cost Assets - The assets within this system that are incurring the highest maintenance and repair costs." |
3 | Click "Review" button on high-cost asset | Navigation: Opens asset's detailed financial/maintenance history page | Business Rule: Shows complete cost and maintenance history | Financial analysis integration |
4 | Predictive Maintenance Alerts: Verify prediction display | Display: Asset Name, ID, Description, Confidence, Timeframe | Bearing Unit B-004 (Bearing replacement needed, 87% confidence, Within 2 weeks) | Tooltip: "Predictive Maintenance Alerts - A list of potential future failures predicted by the analytics engine, allowing for proactive maintenance." |
5 | Verify prediction confidence levels | Confidence Levels: 87%, 72%, 91% displayed with appropriate visual indicators | Business Rule: Higher confidence shows with stronger visual emphasis | Analytics accuracy indication |
6 | Click "Schedule" button on prediction | Work Order Creation: Opens "Create Service Order" form pre-populated with predictive alert details | Business Rule: Pre-fills form with prediction data and recommended actions | Proactive maintenance workflow |
7 | Financial Alert Validation: Verify cost thresholds | Business Rule: Only assets exceeding monthly cost threshold appear in high-cost list | Threshold Logic: Assets with monthly costs > $5,000 | Cost management filtering |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Cost calculations accurate, Predictive alerts functional, Work order integration working
- Secondary_Verifications: Confidence levels displayed correctly, Navigation functional, Data filtering appropriate
- Negative_Verification: Handle prediction failures gracefully, Invalid cost data filtered, Missing confidence handled
Test Case TC_014: Compliance & Inspection Alerts - Violations & Overdue Inspections
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_014
- Title: Compliance & Inspection Alerts - Active Violations & Overdue Inspections
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Compliance Management/Inspection Tracking
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Compliance-Violations, Inspection-Management, Regulatory-Alerts, Due-Date-Tracking, Schedule-Management, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Compliance, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Compliance-System]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Compliance & Inspection Alerts functionality
- Integration_Points: Compliance System, Inspection Database, Work Order System, Schedule Engine
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Alerts-Compliance
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: CSM/Compliance
- Report_Categories: Regulatory-Compliance, Inspection-Management, Violation-Tracking
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Compliance System, Inspection Database, Work Order System, Schedule Engine
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds compliance data load
- Data_Requirements: Compliance violations, inspection schedules, overdue inspections
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Compliance system active, Inspection schedules configured, Violation tracking enabled
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with compliance alerts access
- Test_Data: Active violations, overdue inspections, inspection priorities
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, Alerts tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Alerts Tab → Compliance & Inspection Alerts Section | Section displays with 2 main widgets | Active Violations & Overdue Inspections widgets | Compliance monitoring dashboard |
2 | Active Violations: Verify violation display | Display: Violation Name, Status, Due Date | Water Quality Monitoring (HOLD, Due: 2024-01-27), Safety Protocol Compliance (MONITOR, Due: 2024-01-25) | Tooltip: "Active Violations - A list of current, unresolved compliance violations associated with this system." |
3 | Click "View Details" on violation | Navigation: Opens detailed violation record in Compliance tab | Business Rule: Shows complete violation details and resolution steps | Compliance management integration |
4 | Overdue Inspections: Verify inspection tracking | Display: Asset Name, ID, Priority, Days Overdue | Safety Valve SV-001 (High, Overdue 8 days), Pressure Tank PT-003 (medium, Overdue 6 days) | Tooltip: "Overdue Inspections - Mandatory inspections for assets in this system that have not been completed by their scheduled due date." |
5 | Verify overdue calculation accuracy | Days Overdue Calculation: Current_Date - Scheduled_Due_Date | Safety Valve: 8 days, Pressure Tank: 6 days, Flow Meter: 3 days | Date calculation validation |
6 | Click "Schedule" button on overdue inspection | Work Order Creation: Opens "Create Service Order" form for immediate inspection task | Business Rule: Pre-populates inspection details and asset information | Inspection workflow automation |
7 | Priority Color Coding: Verify visual indicators | High Priority: Red indicators, Medium Priority: Yellow indicators, Low Priority: Green indicators | Visual Validation: Appropriate color coding for inspection priorities | User experience optimization |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Violation tracking accurate, Inspection due dates calculated correctly, Work order creation functional
- Secondary_Verifications: Priority indicators appropriate, Navigation working, Data display complete
- Negative_Verification: Handle missing compliance data, Invalid due dates managed, Failed integrations handled
Test Case TC_015: System Book Value Section - Financial Calculations & Depreciation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_015
- Title: System Book Value - Current Value, Depreciation & Financial Calculations
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Financial Calculation/Accounting Integration
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Financial-Management, Book-Value-Calculation, Depreciation-Logic, Accounting-Integration, Asset-Valuation, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Financial, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Financial-System]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Support/Reporting
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of System Book Value functionality
- Integration_Points: Financial System, Accounting Database, Depreciation Calculator
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Finance
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: CSM/Finance
- Report_Categories: Financial-Reporting, Asset-Valuation, Depreciation-Management
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Financial Database, Depreciation Calculator, Accounting System
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds calculation time
- Data_Requirements: System with complete financial data, depreciation history
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Financial calculation service active, Accounting data available
- User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with financial access
- Test_Data: Initial Capital Cost: $12,00,000, Commission Date: 2018, Current Year: 2025
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, Finance tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: System Detail → Finance Tab → System Book Value Section | Financial overview displays with prominent book value | Current Book Value prominently displayed | Primary financial metric |
2 | Current Book Value: Verify calculation | Formula: Initial_Capital_Cost - Accumulated_Depreciation = $12,00,000 - $3,50,000 = $8,50,000 | Current Book Value: $8,50,000 | Tooltip: "Current Book Value - The current value of the system on the balance sheet after accounting for all depreciation to date." |
3 | Initial Capital Cost: Verify historical value | Original acquisition and installation cost | Initial Capital Cost: $12,00,000 | Tooltip: "Initial Capital Cost - The total original cost to acquire and install this system." |
4 | Accumulated Depreciation: Verify display format | Business Rule: Displayed as negative value in parentheses | Accumulated Depreciation: ($3,50,000) | Tooltip: "Accumulated Depreciation - The sum of all depreciation expenses recorded for this system over its life." |
5 | Salvage Value: Verify end-of-life estimate | Business Rule: Defaults to $0 if not specified | Salvage Value: $0 | Tooltip: "Salvage Value - The estimated resale value of the system at the end of its useful life." |
6 | Click "Calculate Finance" button | Depreciation Calculation: System runs current period depreciation calculation | Business Rule: Updates book value and accumulated depreciation | Tooltip: "Calculate Finance - Manually run the depreciation calculation for the current period and update the system's book value." |
7 | Verify calculation results | Updated Values: Current Book Value and Accumulated Depreciation recalculated | Book value decreases, accumulated depreciation increases | Real-time financial calculation |
8 | History Ledger Update: Verify new entry | Business Rule: New "Annual Depreciation" entry added to History ledger | New ledger entry with current calculation | Audit trail maintenance |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Book value calculation accurate using correct formula, Depreciation logic working properly
- Secondary_Verifications: Display formatting correct, Historical data preserved, Calculation triggers properly
- Negative_Verification: Handle invalid financial data, Calculation errors managed, Negative values formatted correctly
Test Case TC_016: Overview Tab - Depreciation Schedule & Component Lifecycle
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_024
- Title: Overview Tab - System Depreciation Schedule & Components Nearing End-of-Life
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Depreciation Management/Component Tracking
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Depreciation-Schedule, Component-Lifecycle, Capital-Planning, End-of-Life-Management, RUL-Tracking, MOD-Systems, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Asset-Management, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Asset-Database]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Support/Planning
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 12 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Overview Tab functionality
- Integration_Points: Depreciation Calculator, Asset Database, Capital Planning System
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Finance-Overview
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Finance
- Report_Categories: Capital-Planning, Asset-Lifecycle, Financial-Forecasting
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Depreciation Calculator, Asset Database, RUL Calculator
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds data loading
- Data_Requirements: System with component data, RUL information, depreciation schedule
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Asset data complete, RUL calculations available, Depreciation schedule active
- User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with financial planning access
- Test_Data: Components with varying RUL, depreciation schedule data
- Prior_Test_Cases: Finance tab accessible, book value calculations functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Finance Tab → Overview Tab | Overview displays with 2 main widgets | System Depreciation Schedule & Components Nearing End-of-Life | Default finance view |
2 | Annual Depreciation: Verify current year calculation | Formula: (Initial_Capital_Cost - Salvage_Value) / Useful_Life = ($12,00,000 - $0) / 20 = $60,000 | Annual Depreciation (Current Year): $60,000 | Tooltip: "Annual Depreciation - The amount of depreciation expense allocated for the current fiscal year." |
3 | Depreciation to Date: Verify year-to-date amount | Amount of depreciation recorded within current fiscal year | Depreciation to Date (Current Year): $30,000 | Tooltip: "Depreciation to Date - The portion of this year's annual depreciation that has already been recorded." |
4 | Remaining Depreciation: Verify future depreciation | Formula: Current_Book_Value - Salvage_Value = $8,50,000 - $0 = $8,20,000 | Remaining Depreciation: $8,20,000 | Tooltip: "Remaining Depreciation - The total amount of depreciation that has yet to be expensed over the system's remaining useful life." |
5 | Next Depreciation Date: Verify schedule | Business Rule: Typically end of fiscal year | Next Depreciation Date: Dec 31, 2025 | Tooltip: "Next Depreciation Date - The date the next annual depreciation expense will be officially recorded." |
6 | Components Nearing End-of-Life: Verify automatic generation | Business Rule: Query child assets where RUL < 5 years, sorted by RUL ascending | List shows components with RUL < 5 years | Critical capital planning watchlist |
7 | Sand Filter Media: Verify component details | Component Name: "Sand Filter Media", Book Value: $2,500, Est. Replacement: $45,000 | RUL Tag: 1 Year (Red color) | Business Rule: RUL < 2 years = Red |
8 | Control Valve Assembly: Verify component tracking | Component Name: "Control Valve Assembly", Book Value: $8,000, Est. Replacement: $85,000 | RUL Tag: 2 Years (Yellow color) | Business Rule: RUL 2-4 years = Yellow |
9 | Flow Sensor: Verify component data | Component Name: "Flow Sensor", Book Value: $1,200, Est. Replacement: $15,000 | RUL Tag: 3 Years (Yellow color) | Business Rule: RUL 2-4 years = Yellow |
10 | Backwash Pump Motor: Verify long-term component | Component Name: "Backwash Pump Motor", Book Value: $3,500, Est. Replacement: $25,000 | RUL Tag: 4 Years (Green color) | Business Rule: RUL > 4 years = Green |
11 | RUL Color Coding: Verify visual indicators | Color Rules: Red (<2 years), Yellow (2-4 years), Green (>4 years) | Visual validation of color-coded urgency | User experience optimization |
12 | Component Sorting: Verify urgency order | Business Rule: Components sorted by RUL ascending (most urgent first) | List order: 1 Year, 2 Years, 3 Years, 4 Years | Priority-based organization |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Depreciation calculations accurate, Component RUL tracking working, Color coding appropriate
- Secondary_Verifications: Data sorting correct, Visual indicators clear, Financial projections accurate
- Negative_Verification: Handle missing RUL data, Invalid depreciation parameters, Component data inconsistencies
Test Case TC_017: History Tab - Financial Ledger & Event Tracking
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_017
- Title: History Tab - System Financial History Ledger & Event Filtering
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Financial Audit/Data Filtering
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Financial-History, Audit-Trail, Event-Filtering, Ledger-Management, Data-Immutability, MOD-Systems, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Audit, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Financial-Database]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Support/Audit
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of History Tab functionality
- Integration_Points: FinancialLedger Database, Filtering Engine, Audit System
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Finance-History
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: CSM/Audit
- Report_Categories: Financial-Audit, Transaction-History, Compliance-Reporting
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: FinancialLedger Database, Filtering System, Audit Trail
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds data retrieval
- Data_Requirements: Complete financial history, multiple event types
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Financial ledger populated, Historical data available, Filtering system active
- User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with audit access
- Test_Data: Historical financial events, multiple event types, multi-year data
- Prior_Test_Cases: Finance tab functional, financial calculations working
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Finance Tab → History Tab | History tab displays with filters and ledger table | Filters section and Financial History Ledger visible | Audit trail interface |
2 | View Filter: Verify year selection | Dropdown shows available years and "All Years" option | Options: 2025, 2024, 2023, 2022, All Years | Year-based filtering |
3 | Event Type Filter: Verify event categories | Dropdown shows event types and "All Events" option | Options: Annual Depreciation, Component Replacement, Capital Improvement, All Events | Event-based filtering |
4 | Financial History Ledger: Verify table structure | Table displays with required columns | Columns: Effective Date, Event Type, Value Change, Book Value at End, Notes | Complete audit information |
5 | Annual Depreciation Event: Verify entry format | Event: Dec 31, 2024, Annual Depreciation, -$60,000, $9,10,000, "FY 2024 Depreciation" | Business Rule: Depreciation shown as negative value | Standard depreciation entry |
6 | Component Replacement Event: Verify improvement entry | Event: Aug 15, 2024, Component Replacement, +$25,000, $9,70,000, "New filtration media installed" | Business Rule: Improvements shown as positive value | Capital improvement tracking |
7 | Historical Depreciation: Verify previous year | Event: Dec 31, 2023, Annual Depreciation, -$60,000, $9,45,000, "FY 2023 Depreciation" | Consistent annual depreciation | Historical accuracy |
8 | Filter by Year: Test 2024 filter | Select "2024" from View dropdown | Table shows only 2024 events | Year-specific filtering |
9 | Filter by Event Type: Test depreciation filter | Select "Annual Depreciation" from Event Type dropdown | Table shows only depreciation events | Event-specific filtering |
10 | Combined Filtering: Test multiple filters | Select "2024" and "Component Replacement" | Table shows only 2024 component replacements | Multi-criteria filtering |
11 | Data Immutability: Verify read-only ledger | Business Rule: Historical entries cannot be modified | No edit functionality available | Audit trail integrity |
12 | Chronological Order: Verify date sorting | Business Rule: Entries sorted by Effective Date descending (newest first) | Most recent entries at top | Logical data presentation |
13 | Value Change Validation: Verify calculation accuracy | Business Rule: Each Value Change correctly reflects impact on Book Value | Book Value progression mathematically correct | Financial accuracy validation |
14 | Reset Filters: Test filter clearing | Click to reset filters to "All Years" and "All Events" | All historical entries displayed | Complete data access |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Financial ledger accurate, Filtering functional, Data immutability maintained
- Secondary_Verifications: Chronological sorting correct, Value calculations accurate, Event categorization proper
- Negative_Verification: Invalid filter combinations handled, Missing data graceful, Calculation errors prevented
Test Case TC_018: Compliance Summary Cards - Status Overview & Monitoring
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_026
- Title: Compliance Summary Cards - Status Overview & Water Quality Monitoring
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Compliance Monitoring/Status Validation
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke/Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Compliance-Status, Water-Quality-Monitoring, Regulatory-Compliance, Status-Cards, Schedule-Tracking, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Compliance, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Compliance-System]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Compliance Summary Cards functionality
- Integration_Points: ComplianceSchedules Database, WaterQualityReadings Database, SNDWS Guidelines
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Compliance
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: CSM/Compliance Officer
- Report_Categories: Regulatory-Compliance, Water-Quality-Status, Schedule-Monitoring
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: Critical
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: ComplianceSchedules Database, WaterQualityReadings Database, SNDWS Guidelines Database
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds status calculation
- Data_Requirements: Water quality readings, compliance schedules, regulatory guidelines
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Compliance monitoring active, Water quality data available, Regulatory guidelines updated
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with compliance monitoring access
- Test_Data: Monthly water quality samples, compliance schedules, SNDWS guidelines
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, Compliance tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: System Detail → Compliance Tab → Compliance Summary Cards | Two main status cards display | Compliance Status & Water Quality Compliance cards | High-level compliance overview |
2 | Compliance Status Card: Verify status determination | Business Rule: "On Schedule" if no overdue samples, "Overdue" (Red) if Next Sample Due date is past | Status: "On Schedule" (Green) | Data Source: ComplianceSchedules table |
3 | Samples Taken Count: Verify monthly calculation | Count of all water quality samples taken in current calendar month | Samples Taken (This Month): 18 | Data Source: WaterQualityReadings table |
4 | Next Sample Due: Verify earliest date | Earliest Next Due Date from upcoming monitoring schedule | Next Sample Due: July 15, 2025 | Data Source: ComplianceSchedules table |
5 | Click "View Full Schedule" button | Navigation: Opens dedicated compliance schedules page for this system | Business Rule: Shows all compliance schedules for system | Schedule management integration |
6 | Water Quality Compliance Card: Verify compliance status | Business Rule: "In Compliance" if Exceedances = 0, "Violations Found" (Red) if Exceedances > 0 | Status: "In Compliance" (Green) | Data Source: WaterQualityReadings table |
7 | Parameters Monitored Count: Verify distinct parameter count | Count of distinct parameters being monitored for this system | Parameters Monitored: 8 | Data Source: ComplianceSchedules table |
8 | Exceedances Count: Verify violation calculation | Count of readings in last 30 days outside SNDWS Guidelines | Exceedances (Last 30 Days): 0 | Data Source: WaterQualityReadings table |
9 | Click "View Recent Results" button | Navigation: Opens detailed log of recent water quality readings | Business Rule: Shows recent water quality measurement history | Quality data integration |
10 | Status Color Validation: Verify visual indicators | Green: Compliant status, Red: Violation/Overdue status | Both cards show green status indicators | User experience optimization |
11 | Test Overdue Scenario: Simulate past due date | Business Rule: Status changes to "Overdue" (Red) when Next Sample Due < Current Date | Status: "Overdue" (Red) for testing | Negative scenario validation |
12 | Test Violation Scenario: Simulate exceedances | Business Rule: Status changes to "Violations Found" (Red) when Exceedances > 0 | Exceedances: 2, Status: "Violations Found" (Red) | Violation detection testing |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Status logic correct based on business rules, Data counts accurate, Navigation functional
- Secondary_Verifications: Color coding appropriate, Real-time updates working, Integration points functional
- Negative_Verification: Overdue detection accurate, Violation flagging correct, Missing data handled gracefully
Test Case TC_019: Overview Tab - Monthly Compliance Calculation & Parameter Monitoring
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_027
- Title: Overview Tab - Calculate Monthly Compliance & Upcoming Parameter Monitoring
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Compliance Calculation/Monitoring Schedule
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Monthly-Compliance-Calculation, Parameter-Monitoring, Schedule-Management, SNDWS-Guidelines, Report-Generation, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Compliance-Calculation, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Regulatory-System]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 12 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Overview Tab functionality
- Integration_Points: WaterQualityReadings Database, SNDWS Guidelines, Report Generator, History System
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Compliance-Calculation
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: CSM/Compliance Officer
- Report_Categories: Compliance-Calculation, Parameter-Monitoring, Regulatory-Reporting
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: Critical
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: WaterQualityReadings Database, SNDWS Guidelines Database, Report Generator
- Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds calculation processing
- Data_Requirements: Monthly water quality readings, SNDWS guidelines, monitoring schedules
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Water quality data available, SNDWS guidelines updated, Report generator functional
- User_Roles_Permissions: Compliance Officer with calculation access
- Test_Data: Monthly water quality readings, compliance schedules, regulatory parameters
- Prior_Test_Cases: Compliance tab accessible, summary cards functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Compliance Tab → Overview Tab | Overview displays with calculation button and monitoring table | "Calculate Monthly Compliance" button and "Upcoming Parameter Monitoring" table | Default compliance view |
2 | Upcoming Parameter Monitoring Table: Verify structure | Table displays scheduled monitoring activities sorted by Next Due Date ascending | Columns: Parameter, Sampling Location, Frequency, Next Due Date, Status | Business Rule: Sorted by Next Due Date |
3 | Parameter Entries: Verify monitoring schedule | Sample Entries: pH (SSF Treatment Plant Process, Monthly, July 15, 2025, Upcoming), Turbidity (SSF Treatment Plant Process, Monthly, July 15, 2025, Upcoming) | Multiple parameters with consistent formatting | Comprehensive monitoring coverage |
4 | Status Tags: Verify color coding | Yellow: "Upcoming" for future dates, Red: "Overdue" for past dates | Status tags appropriately colored | Visual status indicators |
5 | Click "Calculate Monthly Compliance" button | Multi-step Process: System performs compliance calculation workflow | Business Rule: Triggers comprehensive calculation process | Primary compliance action |
6 | Step 1: Verify data gathering | System gathers all WaterQualityReadings for past month | Data collection from WaterQualityReadings table | Historical data aggregation |
7 | Step 2: Verify monthly average calculation | System calculates Monthly Average for each parameter | Example: pH average = 7.1, Turbidity average = 1.2 NTU | Statistical calculation |
8 | Step 3: Verify compliance comparison | Each average compared against SNDWS Guidelines | Comparison: pH 7.1 vs Guidelines 6.5-8.5 = In Compliance | Regulatory standards validation |
9 | Step 4: Verify violation identification | System identifies individual readings that were violations | Detection: Individual readings exceeding guidelines even if monthly average compliant | Comprehensive violation tracking |
10 | Step 5: Verify report generation | New "Monthly Compliance Report" record created | New report entry in database | Report creation |
11 | Step 6: Verify history entry | Entry added to History tab | New history record with calculation details | Audit trail maintenance |
12 | Step 7: Verify view switch | Business Rule: View automatically switches to newly generated report | Display changes to Monthly Compliance Report view | Workflow automation |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Calculation process complete and accurate, Report generation successful, View transition working
- Secondary_Verifications: Data aggregation correct, Compliance comparison accurate, History tracking functional
- Negative_Verification: Handle missing data gracefully, Invalid calculations prevented, Error states managed
Test Case TC_020: Monthly Compliance Report & History - Report Analysis & Audit Trail
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_028
- Title: Monthly Compliance Report View & History Tab - Report Analysis & Audit Trail
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Report Analysis/Audit Trail
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Monthly-Compliance-Report, Violations-Analysis, History-Audit, Report-Export, Parameter-Analysis, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Compliance-Report, Platform-Web, Report-CSM, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Regulatory-Export]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Support/Compliance
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 18 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Monthly Compliance Report & History functionality
- Integration_Points: Regulatory Database, Report Engine, Export Service, Audit Trail System
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Compliance-Reports
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: CSM/Compliance
- Report_Categories: Regulatory-Compliance, Audit-Trail, Report-Export, Violation-Management
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: Critical
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Regulatory Database, Report Engine, Export Service, Audit System
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds report generation, < 5 seconds export
- Data_Requirements: Historical compliance data, SNDWS guidelines, violation records
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Compliance calculation completed, Historical data available, Export service active
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with compliance reporting access
- Test_Data: Monthly water quality data, SNDWS guidelines, historical compliance records
- Prior_Test_Cases: Compliance calculation executed successfully
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Auto-switched to Monthly Compliance Report view after calculation | Report view displays with parameter analysis and violations | Monthly Average Quality Parameters table and Violations table | Post-calculation report view |
2 | Monthly Average Quality Parameters Table: Verify structure | Columns: Parameter, Monthly Average, SNDWS Guideline, Status | pH (7.1, 6.5-8.5, In Compliance), Turbidity (1.2 NTU, <5 NTU, In Compliance) | Comprehensive parameter analysis |
3 | Status Validation: Verify compliance determination | Green: "In Compliance" when within guidelines, Red: "Violation" when exceeding | All parameters show "In Compliance" (Green) status | Regulatory compliance validation |
4 | Violations Table: Verify conditional display | Business Rule: Table only appears if there were exceedances during period | Table not displayed when no violations present | Conditional violation reporting |
5 | Test Violation Scenario: Simulate exceedances | Violations Table Columns: Parameter, Value Recorded, SNDWS Guideline, Date of Violation, Severity | Turbidity (5.2 NTU, <5 NTU, May 15, 2025, Moderate) | Individual violation tracking |
6 | Severity Calculation: Verify violation severity | Business Rule: "High," "Moderate" based on deviation from guideline | Severity calculated based on exceedance level | Risk-based severity classification |
7 | Click "Back to Overview" button | Navigation: Returns to Upcoming Parameter Monitoring view | Returns to Overview tab with monitoring table | Navigation workflow |
8 | Navigation: Click History Tab | History view displays with filters and historical reports table | Compliance Calculation History with filtering options | Audit trail interface |
9 | Filters Section: Verify filtering options | Filters allow selection by Parameter, Date Range, other criteria | Filter options available for historical data | Data filtering capabilities |
10 | Export Button: Verify regulatory export | Export Functionality: Exports filtered history to CSV/Excel | Business Rule: Critical for regulatory submissions | Regulatory compliance export |
11 | Compliance Calculation History Table: Verify structure | Columns: Report Date, Analysis Period, Parameters Monitored, In Compliance, Violations, Assessed By, Actions | Complete historical audit trail | Comprehensive history tracking |
12 | Historical Entry: Verify report record | Sample Entry: July 10, 2025, June 1-June 30 2025, 8, 8, 0, John Smith, View Report | Historical compliance calculation record | Audit trail validation |
13 | Click "View Report" button | Navigation: Opens detailed Monthly Compliance Report for historical period | Historical report view with same structure as current | Historical report access |
14 | Data Integrity: Verify historical accuracy | Historical reports maintain original data and calculations | Immutable historical compliance records | Data integrity validation |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Report data accurate, History tracking complete, Export functionality working
- Secondary_Verifications: Violations properly identified, Navigation functional, Data integrity maintained
- Negative_Verification: Handle export failures, Missing historical data, Invalid report generation
Test Case TC_021: Assets Management Header & Add Asset Workflow
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_021
- Title: Assets Management Header & Add Asset Wizard Workflow
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Asset Management/Wizard Workflow
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Smoke/Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Asset-Management, Add-Asset-Wizard, Duplicate-Prevention, Asset-Registration, Multi-Step-Workflow, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Smoke, Type-Asset-Management, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Asset-Database]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Assets Management Header functionality
- Integration_Points: Asset Database, Wizard System, Duplicate Detection Engine
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Assets
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Maintenance
- Report_Categories: Asset-Management, Data-Quality, System-Integration
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Asset Database, Wizard System, Suggested Assets Engine
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds wizard loading
- Data_Requirements: Existing assets for suggestion engine testing
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Asset database populated, Wizard system functional, Suggestion engine active
- User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with asset creation rights
- Test_Data: Existing unassociated assets, test facility coordinates
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, Assets tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: System Detail → Assets Tab | Assets management interface displays | Title: "Assets Management", Subtitle: "Monitor and manage all assets within facility systems and networks" | Asset management dashboard |
2 | Header Verification: Verify title and subtitle | Clear section identification displayed | Title and descriptive subtitle present | User interface clarity |
3 | Click "Add Asset" button | Suggested Assets Modal: Automatically opens to prevent duplicates | Business Rule: First presents suggested assets modal | Duplicate prevention workflow |
4 | Suggested Assets Logic: Verify suggestion engine | Location Proximity: Unassociated assets within facility GPS boundary suggested | Assets within geographic boundary of parent facility | Intelligent asset suggestion |
5 | Naming Convention Logic: Verify keyword matching | Naming Convention: Assets with names containing facility/system keywords | Assets with "Main Plant" keywords for Main Plant facility | Smart naming association |
6 | Manual Flagging Logic: Verify technician flags | Manual Flagging: Assets flagged as "needs association" by field technicians | Manually flagged assets in suggestion queue | Field technician integration |
7 | Suggested Assets Display: Verify asset information | List shows: Asset Name, ID, Location with checkboxes | Main Pump Unit (AST-001, Building A-1), Filter Assembly B2 (AST-002, Treatment Plant) | Complete asset identification |
8 | Connect Selected Button: Test selection requirement | Business Rule: Button disabled until at least one asset checked | Button initially disabled | User interaction validation |
9 | Select assets and click "Connect Selected" | Association Update: Updates Parent_ID for selected assets, closes modal, refreshes asset list | Selected assets now associated with current system | Database integration |
10 | Alternative Flow: Click "Skip & Search All" | Modal Transition: Closes Suggested Assets modal, opens Search All Assets modal | Business Rule: Direct transition between modals | Alternative workflow path |
11 | Cancel Flow: Click "Cancel" button | Workflow Cancellation: Closes modal, cancels Add Asset action | Returns to Assets tab without changes | Cancellation handling |
12 | Multi-step Wizard: Verify wizard details | Business Rule: Wizard prompts for asset type, manufacturer, model, serial number, purchase date, cost, parent system | Complete asset registration information | Comprehensive data collection |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Wizard workflow functional, Suggestion engine working, Asset association successful
- Secondary_Verifications: Modal transitions smooth, Data validation working, User interface clear
- Negative_Verification: Handle empty suggestions gracefully, Invalid selections prevented, Cancellation working
Test Case TC_022: Search & Filter Bar - Asset Discovery & Export
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_022
- Title: Search & Filter Bar - Dynamic Search, Advanced Filtering & Export
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Search Filtering/Data Export
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Asset-Search, Dynamic-Filtering, Advanced-Filters, Data-Export, Real-Time-Search, MOD-Systems, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Search-Filter, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Export-System]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Search & Filter functionality
- Integration_Points: Search Engine, Filter System, Export Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Assets-Search
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Data-Access, Search-Performance, Export-Functionality
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Search Engine, Filter System, Export Service
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second search response
- Data_Requirements: Multiple assets with varying properties for filtering
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Search indexing complete, Filter system active, Export service available
- User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with data access rights
- Test_Data: Assets with diverse condition scores, risk scores, uptime percentages
- Prior_Test_Cases: Assets tab accessible, asset data loaded
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Search Functionality: Type in search box | Dynamic Filtering: Asset list filters in real-time as user types | Search: "Pump" | Business Rule: Matches Asset ID or Name |
2 | Search Results: Verify filtering accuracy | Results show only assets with "Pump" in Asset ID or Name | Results: Main Pump Unit, Secondary Pump, Backup Pump Motor | Real-time search validation |
3 | Clear Search: Remove search text | Reset: All assets display again | Full asset list restored | Search state management |
4 | Click "Filter" button | Advanced Filter Modal: Opens with multiple filter options | Filter dropdown/modal with advanced options | Advanced filtering interface |
5 | System/Network Filter: Test parent filter | System Filter: Dropdown shows parent systems/networks | Options: SYS-001/NET-001, SYS-002/NET-002, etc. | Parent entity filtering |
6 | Condition Score Filter: Test range slider | Range Slider: 0-100 range for condition score filtering | Range: 60-100 (excludes poor condition assets) | Condition-based filtering |
7 | Risk Score Filter: Test risk range | Range Slider: 0-100 range for risk score filtering | Range: 0-50 (low to medium risk only) | Risk-based filtering |
8 | Uptime % Filter: Test uptime range | Range Slider: 0-100% range for uptime filtering | Range: 90-100% (high uptime assets only) | Performance-based filtering |
9 | Combined Filters: Apply multiple filters | Multi-criteria Filtering: Results match ALL applied filter criteria | Condition: 80+, Risk: <30, Uptime: >95% | Complex filtering logic |
10 | Export Functionality: Click "Export" button | Data Export: Generates CSV/Excel file respecting active filters | Business Rule: Export includes only filtered results | Export with filtering |
11 | Export File Validation: Verify exported data | File Content: Contains only assets matching current filter criteria | CSV includes filtered asset list with all columns | Data export accuracy |
12 | Filter Reset: Clear all filters | Reset State: All assets display, filters return to default | All filter controls reset to full range | Filter state management |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Search working in real-time, Filters applying correctly, Export respecting filters
- Secondary_Verifications: Performance acceptable, UI responsive, Data accuracy maintained
- Negative_Verification: Empty search results handled, Invalid filter ranges prevented, Export failures managed
Test Case TC_023: Assets Table & Modal Workflows - Comprehensive Asset Management
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_023
- Title: Assets Table Display & Modal Workflows - Complete Asset Management Operations
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Asset Table/Modal Workflows
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Assets-Table, Modal-Workflows, Asset-Operations, Score-Validation, Navigation-Integration, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Asset-Table, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Asset-Operations]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Assets Table and Modal functionality
- Integration_Points: Asset Database, Navigation System, Modal Framework, Action System
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Assets-Table
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Maintenance
- Report_Categories: Asset-Operations, Data-Display, User-Experience
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Asset Database, Navigation System, Modal Framework
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds table loading
- Data_Requirements: Complete asset records with all calculated fields
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Asset data complete, Navigation system active, Modal framework functional
- User_Roles_Permissions: Asset Manager with full asset management access
- Test_Data: Assets with complete information including scores and uptime data
- Prior_Test_Cases: Assets tab accessible, search and filtering functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Assets Table: Verify table structure | Complete Columns: Asset ID, Name, System/Network, Location, Condition Score, Risk Score, Uptime %, Actions | All required columns present with proper headers | Table structure validation |
2 | Asset ID Column: Verify clickable links | Navigation: Asset ID is clickable link to detailed asset profile | Business Rule: Primary key must be clickable | Tooltip: "Asset ID - The unique identifier for this asset. Click to view its detailed profile." |
3 | Click Asset ID link | Navigation: Opens detailed asset profile page | Business Rule: Navigates to asset detail view | Asset profile integration |
4 | Asset Name Column: Verify display | Human-readable asset name display | Name: "Main Pump Unit", "Filter Assembly B2" | Tooltip: "Asset Name - The common name used to identify this asset." |
5 | System/Network Column: Verify parent links | Navigation: Parent system/network is clickable link | Business Rule: Clickable link to parent profile | Tooltip: "Parent System/Network - The parent system or network this asset is a component of." |
6 | Location Column: Verify physical location | Specific physical location display | Location: "Building A-1", "Treatment Plant", "Pump Station" | Tooltip: "Asset Location - The specific physical location of the asset." |
7 | Condition Score: Verify score and color coding | Score Range: 0-100 with color coding | Business Rule: >80=Green, 60-80=Yellow, <60=Red | Tooltip: "Condition Score - The physical health of the asset, based on the most recent inspection or assessment. Higher is better." |
8 | Risk Score: Verify calculation and color | Formula: Probability of Failure × Consequence of Failure | Business Rule: High=Red, Medium=Yellow, Low=Green | Tooltip: "Risk Score - The overall risk this asset poses, combining its likelihood of failure with the consequences of that failure." |
9 | Uptime %: Verify calculation | Formula: (Scheduled Time - Unplanned Downtime) / Scheduled Time × 100 | Example: 98.5%, 94.2%, 91.8% | Tooltip: "Uptime Percentage - The percentage of time this asset has been operational and available as scheduled over the last period." |
10 | Actions Menu: Click kebab menu (...) | Dropdown Menu: Opens with action options | Options: View Details, Edit Asset, Create Service Order, Delete Asset | Asset action menu |
11 | View Details Action: Test navigation | Navigation: Opens detailed asset profile page | Same as clicking Asset ID | Alternative navigation path |
12 | Edit Asset Action: Test edit workflow | Wizard: Opens asset registration wizard in edit mode | Business Rule: Pre-populated with existing asset data | Edit workflow integration |
13 | Create Service Order: Test work order creation | Form: Opens service order form pre-associated with asset | Business Rule: Asset pre-populated in form | Work order integration |
14 | Delete Asset Action: Test deletion protection | Confirmation Modal: Permanent deletion protected by confirmation | Business Rule: Requires confirmation before deletion | Data protection |
15 | Search All Assets Modal: Verify comprehensive search | Modal Structure: Search bar, Asset list table, Connect/Cancel buttons | Business Rule: Shows all unassociated assets | Comprehensive asset search |
16 | Search All Assets - Search Bar: Test filtering | Real-time Filter: Filters by Asset ID, Name, or Location | Search: "Filter" shows filtering assets | Modal search functionality |
17 | Search All Assets - Table: Verify columns | Table Columns: Select (checkbox), Asset ID, Name, Location, Condition | Complete asset information for selection | Asset selection interface |
18 | Connect Selected Logic: Test button state | Business Rule: Button disabled until at least one asset checked | Button state changes with selection | User interaction validation |
19 | Asset Association: Test connection process | Database Update: Updates Parent_ID for selected assets, refreshes main list | Selected assets now appear in main asset table | Association workflow |
20 | Modal Cancellation: Test cancel functionality | State Management: Closes modal without changes | No changes to asset associations | Cancellation handling |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Table displays correctly, All formulas calculate accurately, Navigation working properly
- Secondary_Verifications: Color coding appropriate, Tooltips informative, Modal workflows functional
- Negative_Verification: Handle missing data gracefully, Prevent invalid operations, Confirmation dialogs working
Test Case TC_024: PM Schedules Header Section - Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_018
- Title: PM Schedules Header Section - Title, Subtitle & Create Schedule Button
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/UI/Navigation
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Schedules-Management, PM-Schedules, Header-Validation, Create-Schedule-Wizard, MOD-Systems, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Schedule-Management]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 5 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of PM Schedules Header functionality
- Integration_Points: Schedule Management System, Wizard Navigation
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Schedules-Header
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Maintenance
- Report_Categories: Schedule-Management, User-Experience, Navigation
- Trend_Tracking: No
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Schedule Management System, Wizard Framework
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds page load
- Data_Requirements: Access to schedule creation functionality
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Schedule management system active, User permissions configured
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with schedule creation rights
- Test_Data: N/A for header validation
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, Schedules tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: System Detail → Schedules Tab | Schedules tab loads with PM Schedules header section | URL: /systems/FILT-RSF-002/schedules | Tab navigation functional |
2 | Verify PM Schedules title | Title Display: "PM Schedules" clearly visible as section header | Title: "PM Schedules" | Clear section identification |
3 | Verify subtitle text | Subtitle Display: "Preventive maintenance and inspection schedules for this facility." | Business Rule: System-specific subtitle text | Contextual description |
4 | Verify Create Schedule button presence | Button Display: "Create Schedule" button visible and properly styled | Primary CTA: Blue button, right-aligned | Primary action button |
5 | Hover over Create Schedule button | Visual Feedback: Button shows hover state with color change | UX Validation: Interactive feedback | User experience validation |
6 | Click Create Schedule button | Navigation: Multi-step schedule creation wizard opens | Business Rule: Opens wizard for schedule definition | Functionality: Schedule name, type, frequency, assets, tasks configuration |
7 | Verify wizard step 1 loads | Wizard Display: Step 1 of schedule creation wizard with form fields | Form Fields: Schedule name, type selection | Multi-step process initiation |
8 | Cancel wizard and return | Navigation: Return to schedules tab without creating schedule | Navigation: Cancel button or close wizard | Return to schedules list |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Header elements display correctly, Create Schedule button functional
- Secondary_Verifications: Text content accurate, Button styling appropriate, Navigation smooth
- Negative_Verification: Handle wizard cancellation gracefully, Button states appropriate
Test Case TC_025: Scheduled Activities Table - Complete Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_025
- Title: Scheduled Activities Table - All Columns & Business Rules Validation
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Data Display/Business Logic
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Scheduled-Activities-Table, Schedule-Management, Business-Rules-Validation, Status-Logic, Progress-Calculation, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Schedule-Engine]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Scheduled Activities Table functionality
- Integration_Points: Schedule Engine, Work Order System, Asset Database, Telemetry System
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Schedules-Table
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Operations
- Report_Categories: Schedule-Management, Maintenance-Planning, Operational-Excellence
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Schedule Engine, Work Order System, Asset Database, Telemetry Integration
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds table load
- Data_Requirements: Active schedules, completed work orders, asset associations
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Schedule system active, Work orders available, Asset telemetry functional
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with schedule management access
- Test_Data: Multiple schedules with different statuses, frequencies, and progress states
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC_018 passed, schedules tab accessible
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Schedules Tab → Scheduled Activities Table | Complete table displays with all scheduled activities | Table Layout: 11 columns with data rows | Main table component |
2 | Schedule ID Column: Verify unique identifiers | Data Display: Unique schedule IDs (e.g., PM-PUMP-001, INSP-HYDR-005) | Business Rule: Primary key for each schedule | Tooltip: "Schedule ID - The unique identifier for this recurring maintenance schedule." |
3 | Schedule Name Column: Verify descriptive names | Data Display: Human-readable names (e.g., "Monthly Pump Inspection - Station 3") | Business Rule: Descriptive purpose identification | Tooltip: "Schedule Name - A descriptive name for this maintenance plan." |
4 | Type Column: Verify color-coded classification | Data Display: Type tags with colors - "Preventive Maintenance" (Blue), "Inspection" (Green) | Business Rule: Pre-defined list from Settings, color-coded tags | Tooltip: "Schedule Type - The classification of this schedule, which determines the type of work orders it generates." |
5 | Frequency Column: Verify time/usage-based triggers | Data Display: Monthly, Quarterly, Every 500 Hrs, etc. | Business Rule: Time-based or usage-based frequencies | Tooltip: "Frequency - The trigger for generating the next work order. This can be based on time or asset usage." |
6 | Runs Column: Verify completion count | Data Display: Total completed runs (e.g., 24, 8, 2) | Business Rule: Count of completed work orders from this schedule | Tooltip: "Runs - The total number of times this scheduled maintenance has been successfully completed to date." |
7 | Assets Column: Verify asset count | Data Display: Number of assets covered (e.g., 5, 12, 25) | Business Rule: Single schedule can apply to multiple similar assets | Tooltip: "Assets Covered - The number of individual assets included in this recurring schedule." |
8 | Next Due Date Column: Verify calculated dates | Formula: Last_Completed_Date + Frequency = Next_Due_Date | Example: June 15 + Monthly = July 15, 2025 | Tooltip: "Next Due Date - The date the next work order generated by this schedule is due." |
9 | Last Completed Column: Verify completion dates | Data Display: Most recent work order completion dates | Historical completion tracking | Tooltip: "Last Completed Date - The date the most recent maintenance cycle for this schedule was completed." |
10 | Progress Column: Verify multi-asset progress | Formula: (Number_of_Assets_Completed / Total_Assets_in_Schedule) | Example: "3/5 Completed" for schedule with 5 assets | Tooltip: "Progress - The completion progress for the current maintenance cycle, especially for schedules covering multiple assets." |
11 | Status Column: Verify color-coded status logic | Active (Green): Schedule running normally | Business Rule: Color-coded status tags | Status Logic Validation: Active/Overdue/Inactive states |
12 | Verify Overdue status calculation | Overdue (Red): Next_Due_Date < Current_Date AND work order incomplete | Business Rule: Overdue when past due date | Status Validation: Red tag for overdue schedules |
13 | Verify Inactive status display | Inactive/Paused (Gray): Manually paused schedules | Business Rule: Paused schedules not generating work orders | Status Validation: Gray tag for inactive |
14 | Actions Column: Verify kebab menu | Menu Display: "..." icon opens dropdown with action options | Actions Available: View Details, Edit, Run Now, View History, Deactivate/Activate | Tooltip: "Actions - Perform an action on this master schedule." |
15 | Click "View Details" action | Navigation: Opens detailed profile page for selected schedule | Business Rule: Navigate to schedule details | Schedule management integration |
16 | Click "Edit Schedule" action | Navigation: Opens schedule editing wizard | Business Rule: Modify schedule parameters | Schedule modification functionality |
17 | Click "Run Now" action | Work Order Generation: Manually creates immediate work order | Business Rule: Generate work order regardless of due date | Manual schedule execution |
18 | Click "View History" action | Navigation: Shows all past work orders from this schedule | Business Rule: Historical work order tracking | Schedule history audit trail |
19 | Click "Deactivate" action | Status Change: Schedule status changes to Inactive/Paused | Business Rule: Stops automatic work order generation | Schedule lifecycle management |
20 | Verify usage-based frequency calculation | Usage Integration: "Every 500 Hrs" schedules track asset runtime | Business Rule: Requires SCADA/IoT telemetry integration | Asset usage monitoring |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: All column data displays correctly, Business rules applied accurately, Status logic functions properly
- Secondary_Verifications: Tooltips informative, Color coding appropriate, Actions functional
- Negative_Verification: Handle missing data gracefully, Invalid frequencies rejected, Status calculations robust
Test Case TC_026: O&M Search & Filter Bar - Complete Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_026
- Title: O&M Tab Search & Filter Bar - Search, Filter & Export Functionality
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Search/Filter/Export
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, O&M-Management, Service-Orders, Search-Functionality, Advanced-Filtering, Data-Export, Real-Time-Search, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Work-Management]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 12 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of O&M Search & Filter functionality
- Integration_Points: Service Order Database, Search Engine, Export Service, Filter Engine
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-O&M-Search
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Operations
- Report_Categories: Work-Management, Search-Performance, Data-Export, User-Experience
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Service Order Database, Search Engine, Export Service, Filter System
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second search response, < 5 seconds export generation
- Data_Requirements: Multiple service orders with various types, priorities, statuses
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Service order system active, Search indexing complete, Export service available
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with O&M access and export permissions
- Test_Data: Service orders with different SO IDs, names, asset associations, types, priorities, statuses
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, O&M tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: System Detail → O&M Tab | O&M tab loads with search & filter bar at top | URL: /systems/FILT-RSF-002/o-m | Work management interface |
2 | Search Box: Verify placeholder text | Display: "Search service orders..." placeholder visible | UI Element: Free-text search input field | User guidance |
3 | Real-time Search: Type SO ID | Dynamic Filtering: List updates to show matching service orders | Search Term: "SO-001" | Business Rule: Case-insensitive search, real-time filtering |
4 | Verify SO ID search results | Results: Service orders with SO ID containing "SO-001" displayed | Expected Matches: SO-001, SO-001-A, WO-SO-001 | SO ID matching validation |
5 | Clear Search: Clear search box | Reset: Full list of service orders returns | Action: Clear search input | Reset functionality |
6 | Search SO Name: Type service order name | Dynamic Filtering: List filters by SO Name matches | Search Term: "Pump Maintenance" | SO Name search validation |
7 | Verify SO Name search results | Results: Orders with names containing "Pump Maintenance" | Expected Matches: "Monthly Pump Maintenance", "Pump Maintenance - Emergency" | Name-based filtering |
8 | Search Asset Name: Type asset identifier | Dynamic Filtering: List filters by Asset Name/ID matches | Search Term: "AST-001" | Asset association search |
9 | Verify Asset search results | Results: Service orders associated with assets containing "AST-001" | Expected Matches: Orders for AST-001, AST-001-A, etc. | Asset-based filtering |
10 | Case-Insensitive Test: Type lowercase search term | Search Functionality: Results include uppercase matches | Search Term: "pump" should match "PUMP", "Pump", "pump" | Business Rule: Case-insensitive search |
11 | Filter Button: Click Filter button | Filter Panel: Dropdown or modal opens with advanced filter options | Filter Categories: Type, Priority, Status, Date Range | Advanced filtering interface |
12 | Type Filter: Select multiple SO types | Multi-Select: Checkboxes for Preventive, Corrective, Inspection, Emergency | Selections: Check "Preventive" and "Corrective" | Business Rule: Multi-select checklist |
13 | Apply Type filter | Results Update: List shows only selected SO types | Expected: Only Preventive and Corrective orders visible | Filter application |
14 | Priority Filter: Select priority levels | Multi-Select: Checkboxes for High, Medium, Low, Critical | Selections: Check "High" and "Critical" | Priority-based filtering |
15 | Apply Priority filter | Combined Filtering: List shows orders matching both Type AND Priority filters | Expected: Preventive/Corrective orders with High/Critical priority | Multiple filter combination |
16 | Status Filter: Select order statuses | Multi-Select: Checkboxes for In Progress, Completed, Scheduled, Active, On Hold | Selections: Check "In Progress" and "Scheduled" | Status-based filtering |
17 | Apply Status filter | Triple Filtering: List shows orders matching Type, Priority, AND Status | Expected: Filtered results meeting all criteria | Complex filter validation |
18 | Date Range Filter: Set creation date range | Date Picker: Start and end date selection for creation or due date | Date Range: Last 30 days (2025-07-21 to 2025-08-20) | Temporal filtering |
19 | Apply Date Range filter | Quadruple Filtering: List shows orders matching all four filter criteria | Expected: Orders within date range and other selected filters | Complete filter combination |
20 | Export Button: Click Export button | Export Generation: CSV/Excel file generation initiated | Business Rule: Respects active search and filter criteria | Data export functionality |
21 | Verify export file generation | File Download: Export file contains only currently filtered results | Validation: Exported data matches displayed filtered list | Business Rule: Export respects active filters |
22 | Clear Filters: Remove all applied filters | Reset: Full service orders list returns | Action: Clear all filter selections | Filter reset functionality |
23 | Performance Test: Rapid search typing | Real-time Response: Search results update smoothly without lag | Test: Rapid typing in search box | Performance validation |
24 | Empty Search Results: Search for non-existent term | No Results: Appropriate "No results found" message | Search Term: "NONEXISTENT123" | Empty state handling |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Search functionality works in real-time, Filters apply correctly, Export respects active criteria
- Secondary_Verifications: Case-insensitive search accurate, Multi-select filters functional, Performance acceptable
- Negative_Verification: Handle empty results gracefully, Invalid date ranges rejected, Filter combinations logical
Test Case TC_027: Service Orders Table - Complete Column Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_027
- Title: Service Orders Table - All Columns & Business Rules Validation
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Data Display/Business Logic
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Service-Orders-Table, Work-Management, Business-Rules-Validation, Status-Logic, Priority-Coding, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Service-Order-System]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Service Orders Table functionality
- Integration_Points: Service Order Database, Asset Database, System Hierarchy, Workflow Engine
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-ServiceOrders-Table
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Operations
- Report_Categories: Work-Management, Maintenance-Tracking, Operational-Excellence
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Service Order System, Asset Database, Workflow Engine, Location Services
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds table load
- Data_Requirements: Multiple service orders with complete data across all columns
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Service order system active, Asset associations complete, Workflow engine functional
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with service order management access
- Test_Data: Service orders with various types, priorities, statuses, assets, locations
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC_020 passed, O&M tab accessible
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: O&M Tab → Service Orders Table | Complete table displays with all service order columns | Table Layout: 9 columns with service order data | Main table component |
2 | SO ID Column: Verify unique identifiers | Data Display: System-generated unique IDs (e.g., SO-001, SO-002, WO-024-001) | Business Rule: Primary key for each service order | Tooltip: "Service Order ID - The unique identifier for this work order." |
3 | SO Name Column: Verify descriptive names | Data Display: Human-readable task descriptions (e.g., "Pump Maintenance", "Filter Replacement") | Business Rule: Brief work description | Tooltip: "Service Order Name - A brief description of the work to be performed." |
4 | Asset Name/ID Column: Verify asset associations | Data Display: Both common name and unique ID (e.g., "Main Pump Unit AST-001") | Business Rule: Specific asset work target | Tooltip: "Target Asset - The specific asset that is the subject of this service order." |
5 | System/Network Column: Verify hierarchical context | Data Display: Parent system or network (e.g., "SYS-001 / NET-001", "Filtration System") | Business Rule: Hierarchical operational context | Tooltip: "Parent System/Network - The parent system or network that this asset belongs to, providing operational context." |
6 | Location Column: Verify physical locations | Data Display: Specific work locations (e.g., "Building A-1", "Treatment Plant", "Pump Station") | Business Rule: Physical location identification | Tooltip: "Location - The physical location of the asset where the work will take place." |
7 | Type Column: Verify classification from Settings | Data Display: Pre-defined work types (Preventive, Corrective, Inspection) | Business Rule: Options from Settings configuration | Tooltip: "Service Order Type - The classification of this work (e.g., planned preventive work vs. unplanned corrective work)." |
8 | Priority Column: Verify color-coded urgency | Color Coding: High=Red, Medium=Yellow, Low=Green, Critical=Dark Red | Business Rule: Priority levels managed in Settings | Tooltip: "Priority - The urgency of this work order, which dictates scheduling and resource allocation." |
9 | Status Column: Verify workflow lifecycle | Color-Coded Tags: In Progress, Completed, Scheduled, Active, On Hold | Business Rule: Status options managed by workflow engine | Tooltip: "Status - The current stage of this service order in its lifecycle." |
10 | Actions Column: Verify primary View action | Action Display: "View" button prominently displayed | Business Rule: Primary action navigates to detailed SO page | Tooltip: "Actions - View the full details of this service order." |
11 | Click "View" action button | Navigation: Opens detailed service order page | Business Rule: Shows technicians, parts, notes, completion details | Service order detail integration |
12 | Actions Dropdown: Verify additional actions | Dropdown Menu: "..." icon opens additional actions menu | Actions Available: Edit, Cancel (based on permissions and status) | Conditional action availability |
13 | Verify Status-dependent actions | Conditional Display: Actions vary based on SO status and user permissions | Business Rule: Active orders show Edit/Cancel, Completed orders show limited actions | Dynamic action logic |
14 | High Priority Validation: Verify red color coding | Color Display: High priority orders display red tags | Priority Test: High=Red background tag | Visual priority indication |
15 | Medium Priority Validation: Verify yellow color coding | Color Display: Medium priority orders display yellow tags | Priority Test: Medium=Yellow background tag | Visual priority indication |
16 | Low Priority Validation: Verify green color coding | Color Display: Low priority orders display green tags | Priority Test: Low=Green background tag | Visual priority indication |
17 | Critical Priority Validation: Verify dark red coding | Color Display: Critical priority orders display dark red tags | Priority Test: Critical=Dark Red background | Highest priority indication |
18 | In Progress Status: Verify active work indication | Status Display: In Progress orders show active status styling | Status Validation: Work currently being performed | Workflow status tracking |
19 | Completed Status: Verify completion indication | Status Display: Completed orders show finished status styling | Status Validation: Work finished successfully | Completion tracking |
20 | Scheduled Status: Verify future work indication | Status Display: Scheduled orders show planned status styling | Status Validation: Work planned for future | Planning status |
21 | Data Integrity: Verify asset-system relationships | Relationship Validation: Asset belongs to displayed system/network | Business Rule: Asset hierarchy correctly displayed | Data consistency |
22 | Location Consistency: Verify asset location matching | Location Validation: Asset location matches work order location | Business Rule: Physical location consistency | Location data integrity |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: All column data displays correctly, Business rules applied accurately, Color coding functional
- Secondary_Verifications: Tooltips informative, Asset relationships correct, Actions contextual
- Negative_Verification: Handle missing data gracefully, Invalid relationships flagged, Permission-based actions enforced
Test Case TC_028: Pagination Controls - Navigation Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_028
- Title: O&M Tab Pagination Controls - Previous/Next & Page Numbers Validation
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Navigation/UI
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Pagination-Controls, Table-Navigation, UI-Navigation, Large-Dataset-Handling, MOD-Systems, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Navigation, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Table-Engine]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Low
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Low
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Pagination functionality
- Integration_Points: Table Engine, Data Pagination Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Pagination
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: User-Experience, Navigation, Data-Display
- Trend_Tracking: No
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Low
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Pagination Service, Table Engine
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second page navigation
- Data_Requirements: Large dataset requiring multiple pages (50+ service orders)
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Large service order dataset available, Pagination configured
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with O&M access
- Test_Data: 50+ service orders to enable pagination
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC_020 and TC_021 passed, service orders table functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: O&M Tab with large dataset | Service orders table displays with pagination controls at bottom | Data Requirement: 50+ service orders | Pagination triggers |
2 | Initial Page State: Verify page 1 display | Page Display: Page 1 selected, Previous button disabled | Current Page: Page 1 highlighted | Initial state validation |
3 | Previous Button: Verify disabled state | Button State: Previous button grayed out and non-clickable on page 1 | Business Rule: Previous disabled on first page | Edge case handling |
4 | Next Button: Verify enabled state | Button State: Next button enabled and clickable | Business Rule: Next enabled when more pages exist | Navigation availability |
5 | Click Next Button: Navigate to page 2 | Page Navigation: Table updates to show page 2 results | Page Change: Page 2 data loads | Forward navigation |
6 | Page 2 State: Verify navigation state | Page Display: Page 2 highlighted, Previous enabled, Next enabled/disabled based on total pages | Current Page: Page 2 selected | Mid-pagination state |
7 | Previous Button: Click to return to page 1 | Page Navigation: Table returns to page 1 results | Page Change: Page 1 data reloads | Backward navigation |
8 | Direct Page Navigation: Click page number 3 | Page Jump: Table jumps directly to page 3 | Business Rule: Direct page access | Page jumping |
9 | Page Number Highlighting: Verify current page visual | Visual State: Current page number visually highlighted (bold, different color) | Current Page: Page 3 highlighted | Visual feedback |
10 | Last Page Navigation: Navigate to final page | Final Page: Last page displays with Next button disabled | Business Rule: Next disabled on last page | End boundary testing |
11 | Last Page State: Verify final page behavior | Button State: Previous enabled, Next disabled | Edge Case: Final page navigation restrictions | Boundary validation |
12 | Page Count Display: Verify total pages shown | Page Display: Total page count visible (e.g., "Page 5 of 8") | Information: Page context provided | User orientation |
13 | Performance Test: Rapid page navigation | Response Time: Page changes occur smoothly within 1 second | Performance: Navigation responsiveness | Performance validation |
14 | Data Consistency: Verify unique records per page | Data Integrity: No duplicate service orders across pages | Business Rule: Unique records per page | Data integrity |
15 | Filter + Pagination: Apply filter and verify pagination | Combined Function: Filtered results paginate correctly | Integration: Filter affects pagination | Feature integration |
16 | Search + Pagination: Search term with pagination | Combined Function: Search results paginate appropriately | Integration: Search affects pagination | Search-pagination integration |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Pagination controls function correctly, Button states appropriate, Page navigation accurate
- Secondary_Verifications: Visual highlighting correct, Performance acceptable, Data integrity maintained
- Negative_Verification: Button disable states enforced, Page boundaries respected, Invalid pages handled
Test Case TC_029: Files & Documents Header - Upload Functionality
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_029
- Title: Files & Documents Header - Title, Subtitle & Upload Files Functionality
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/File Upload/UI
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Files-Management, Document-Upload, File-Selection, Progress-Indicators, File-Restrictions, MOD-Systems, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-File-Management, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-File-Storage]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 8 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Files Header functionality
- Integration_Points: File Storage Service, Upload Progress Tracker, File Validation Engine
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Files-Header
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Operations
- Report_Categories: Document-Management, File-Upload, User-Experience
- Trend_Tracking: No
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: File Storage Service, Upload Handler, Validation Engine
- Performance_Baseline: < 30 seconds upload for 10MB file
- Data_Requirements: Test files of various types and sizes
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: File storage service active, Upload validation configured
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with file upload rights
- Test_Data: Test files: document.pdf (2MB), image.jpg (1MB), video.mp4 (15MB), invalid.exe (1MB)
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, Files tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: System Detail → Files Tab | Files tab loads with Files & Documents header section | URL: /systems/FILT-RSF-002/files | Document management interface |
2 | Header Title: Verify section title | Display: "Files & Documents" clearly visible as section header | Title: "Files & Documents" | Clear section identification |
3 | Subtitle: Verify descriptive text | Display: "Manage facility-related documents, media files, and attachments." | Business Rule: System-specific subtitle | Contextual description |
4 | Upload Files Button: Verify presence and styling | Button Display: "Upload Files" button visible and properly styled | Primary CTA: Blue button with upload icon | Primary action button |
5 | Click Upload Files: Trigger file selection | File Dialog: Operating system's file selection dialog opens | Business Rule: OS native file picker | Functionality: Single and multiple file selection |
6 | Single File Upload: Select one file | File Selection: Single PDF file selected for upload | Test File: document.pdf (2MB) | Single file upload test |
7 | Progress Indicator: Verify upload progress | Progress Display: Progress indicator appears showing upload status | Business Rule: Progress bar for each uploading file | Visual upload feedback |
8 | File Size Validation: Test size restrictions | Validation: Large file triggers size restriction warning | Test File: large_video.mp4 (100MB) | Business Rule: File size limits enforced |
9 | File Type Validation: Test type restrictions | Validation: Invalid file type rejected with error message | Test File: malicious.exe (1MB) | Business Rule: File type restrictions enforced |
10 | Multiple File Upload: Select multiple files | Multi-Selection: Multiple files selected simultaneously | Test Files: document.pdf, image.jpg, spreadsheet.xlsx | Business Rule: Bulk file upload support |
11 | Upload Completion: Verify successful upload | Success State: Files appear in appropriate categories after upload | Expected: Files categorized automatically | Upload completion validation |
12 | Error Handling: Test upload failure | Error Display: Clear error message for failed uploads | Simulation: Network interruption during upload | Graceful error handling |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Header elements display correctly, Upload Files button functional, File validation working
- Secondary_Verifications: Progress indicators accurate, Error handling appropriate, Multiple upload support
- Negative_Verification: File restrictions enforced, Invalid uploads rejected, Error states managed
Test Case TC_030: File Categorization - Automatic Organization
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_030
- Title: File Categorization - MIME Type & Extension Based Auto-Organization
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/File Organization/Business Logic
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, File-Categorization, MIME-Type-Detection, Auto-Organization, File-Extension-Rules, MOD-Systems, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-File-Management, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-File-Classification]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Low
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of File Categorization functionality
- Integration_Points: File Classification Engine, MIME Type Detector, Category Manager
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Files-Categorization
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Document-Management, File-Organization, User-Experience
- Trend_Tracking: No
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Low
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: File Classification Service, MIME Type Detection
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds categorization
- Data_Requirements: Files of various types for categorization testing
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: File classification engine active, Category rules configured
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with file upload access
- Test_Data: Media files, documents, drawings, other file types
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC_023 passed, file upload functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Upload Media Files: Upload image files | Categorization: Files automatically placed in "Media Files" section | Test Files: facility_overview.jpg, inspection_video.mp4, site_photo.png | Business Rule: MIME type/extension based categorization |
2 | Verify Media File Extensions: Test various media formats | Media Category: Files with extensions .jpg, .jpeg, .png, .gif, .mp4, .mov, .avi categorized as Media | File Extensions: .jpg, .png, .mp4, .mov | Rule: Media file extension detection |
3 | Upload Document Files: Upload business documents | Categorization: Files automatically placed in "Documents" section | Test Files: manual.pdf, report.docx, data.xlsx, presentation.pptx | Business Rule: Document type categorization |
4 | Verify Document Extensions: Test various document formats | Documents Category: Files with extensions .pdf, .docx, .doc, .xlsx, .xls, .pptx, .txt categorized as Documents | File Extensions: .pdf, .docx, .xlsx, .pptx | Rule: Document file extension detection |
5 | Upload Drawing Files: Upload technical drawings | Categorization: Files automatically placed in "Drawings" section (if configured) | Test Files: schematic.dwg, layout.dxf | Business Rule: Technical drawing categorization |
6 | Verify Drawing Extensions: Test CAD file formats | Drawings Category: Files with extensions .dwg, .dxf categorized as Drawings | File Extensions: .dwg, .dxf | Rule: CAD file extension detection |
7 | Upload Miscellaneous Files: Upload uncategorized file types | Categorization: Files placed in "Other" or miscellaneous category | Test Files: data.csv, config.xml, script.js | Business Rule: Default category for unrecognized types |
8 | MIME Type Override: Test MIME type detection vs extension | Priority: MIME type takes precedence over file extension | Test File: image.txt (actual image with wrong extension) | Business Rule: MIME type detection accuracy |
9 | Category Display: Verify category sections appear | UI Display: Categories appear only when files are present | Expected: Media Files, Documents sections visible | Dynamic category display |
10 | Empty Category Handling: Verify empty category behavior | UI Behavior: Empty categories hidden or show empty state | Test: Remove all files from a category | Clean UI for empty states |
11 | Mixed Upload: Upload files of different types simultaneously | Batch Categorization: Multiple files categorized correctly in single upload | Test Files: Mix of images, documents, videos | Business Rule: Batch categorization accuracy |
12 | Recategorization: Test manual category changes | Manual Override: User can manually move files between categories (if supported) | Action: Move document to media category | Category management flexibility |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Files categorized correctly based on MIME type and extensions, Categories display properly
- Secondary_Verifications: Edge cases handled, Mixed uploads work, UI updates dynamically
- Negative_Verification: Unknown file types handled gracefully, Empty categories managed, Invalid MIME types processed
Test Case TC_031: File Card Component - Complete Metadata & Actions
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_031
- Title: File Card Component - Metadata Display & Action Validation
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/UI/File Management
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, File-Card-Component, File-Metadata, File-Actions, Download-Preview, File-Management, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-File-Management, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-File-Services]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of File Card functionality
- Integration_Points: File Storage, Preview Service, Download Handler, File History, User Directory
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Files-Card
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Operations
- Report_Categories: Document-Management, File-Access, User-Experience
- Trend_Tracking: No
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: File Storage Service, Preview Engine, Download Handler, User Directory
- Performance_Baseline: < 3 seconds preview load, < 5 seconds download
- Data_Requirements: Files with complete metadata, various file types
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: File services active, Preview engine functional, User directory accessible
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with file management access
- Test_Data: Files uploaded with known metadata: facility_overview.jpg, maintenance_manual.pdf, system_specs.xlsx
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC_023 and TC_024 passed, files uploaded and categorized
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | File Card Display: Verify file card components | Card Layout: File card displays with all metadata elements | File: facility_overview.jpg | Complete card component validation |
2 | File Name: Verify name display and clickability | Name Display: File name with extension visible, clickable for download/view | Business Rule: Click initiates download or browser view | Data Source: File metadata table |
3 | File Name Click: Test file name click action | Download/View: File opens in new tab (PDF/image) or downloads | Test Files: facility_overview.jpg (view), maintenance_manual.pdf (view) | Business Rule: Browser-supported files open, others download |
4 | File Size: Verify size calculation and display | Size Display: Size shown in appropriate units (KB, MB, GB) | Formula: Raw bytes converted to readable units | File: 2.4 MB, 45.2 MB, 856 KB |
5 | Size Formula Validation: Test size conversion accuracy | Size Calculation: 2,400,000 bytes = 2.4 MB, 1,024 bytes = 1 KB | Formula: Bytes to KB/MB/GB conversion | Mathematical accuracy validation |
6 | Uploaded By: Verify user attribution | User Display: Name of uploading user shown | Data Source: File metadata linked to User Directory | User: John Smith, Sarah Johnson |
7 | Upload Date: Verify date display | Date Display: Upload date in readable format | Data Source: File metadata table | Date: 2024-06-25, 2024-06-24 |
8 | Download Icon: Test download functionality | Download Action: Click download icon triggers file download | Business Rule: Direct download to user's computer | Tooltip: "Download File - Click to download this file to your device." |
9 | Preview Icon: Test preview for supported files | Preview Action: Click preview icon opens file in modal/new tab | Business Rule: Enabled for browser-renderable files | Tooltip: "Preview File - Click to open a preview of this file without downloading." |
10 | Preview Support: Verify supported file types | Preview Availability: Images, PDFs, plain text, some videos support preview | Test Files: image.jpg (✓), document.pdf (✓), video.mp4 (✓) | Supported file type validation |
11 | Preview Disabled: Test unsupported file types | Preview Disabled: Excel, Word, CAD files show disabled/hidden preview | Test Files: spreadsheet.xlsx (✗), drawing.dwg (✗) | Business Rule: Preview disabled for unsupported types |
12 | Preview Tooltip: Verify unsupported file tooltip | Tooltip Message: "Preview not available for this file type" for unsupported files | Unsupported Files: .xlsx, .dwg, .exe | User guidance for limitations |
13 | More Actions Menu: Test kebab menu | Menu Display: "..." icon opens dropdown with additional actions | Actions Available: Edit Details, Move, View History, Delete | Tooltip: "More Actions - View more options for this file." |
14 | Edit Details Action: Test file detail editing | Modal Display: Edit modal opens allowing file rename and description | Business Rule: User can modify file metadata | File management functionality |
15 | Move Action: Test file reassociation | Move Function: User can re-associate file with different entity | Business Rule: File can be moved to different asset/system | File organization flexibility |
16 | View History Action: Test file access log | History Display: Shows file access log and version history | Business Rule: Track file access and modifications | File audit trail |
17 | Delete Action: Test file deletion | Confirmation Modal: "Are you sure you want to permanently delete this file? This action cannot be undone." | Business Rule: Deletion protected by confirmation | Irreversible action protection |
18 | Delete Confirmation: Complete file deletion | File Removal: File permanently removed from system after confirmation | Business Rule: File deleted from storage and metadata | Permanent deletion validation |
19 | Permission-based Actions: Verify action availability | Conditional Display: Actions vary based on user permissions | Business Rule: Edit/Delete may be restricted for some users | Permission-based UI |
20 | File Type Icons: Verify file type indicators | Visual Indicators: Different file types show appropriate icons | Icons: PDF, Image, Video, Document icons | Visual file type identification |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: File cards display correctly, All metadata accurate, Actions function properly
- Secondary_Verifications: Tooltips informative, Preview works for supported types, Permissions enforced
- Negative_Verification: Unsupported previews handled, Deletion confirmation required, Invalid actions blocked
Test Case TC_032: Notes & Comments Header - Export Functionality
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_032
- Title: Notes & Comments Header - Title, Subtitle & Export Functionality
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Data Export/UI
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Notes-Management, Data-Export, Notes-Header, CSV-Export, Search-Filter-Export, MOD-Systems, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-Medium, Revenue-Impact-Low, Integration-Export-Service]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Low
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Low
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Notes Header functionality
- Integration_Points: Export Service, Notes Database, Search/Filter Engine
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Notes-Header
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Operations
- Report_Categories: Notes-Management, Data-Export, User-Experience
- Trend_Tracking: No
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Low
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Export Service, Notes Database, Search Engine
- Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds export generation
- Data_Requirements: Multiple notes with different creators and timestamps
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Notes system active, Export service available
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with notes access and export permissions
- Test_Data: Notes with content, creators, timestamps for export testing
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, Notes tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: System Detail → Notes Tab | Notes tab loads with Notes & Comments header section | URL: /systems/FILT-RSF-002/notes | Notes management interface |
2 | Header Title: Verify section title | Display: "Notes & Comments" clearly visible as section header | Title: "Notes & Comments" | Clear section identification |
3 | Subtitle: Verify descriptive text | Display: "Add and view notes related to this facility." | Business Rule: System-specific subtitle | Contextual description |
4 | Export Button: Verify presence and styling | Button Display: "Export" button visible and properly styled | Export CTA: Secondary button styling | Data export functionality |
5 | Export All Notes: Click Export with no filters | Export Generation: CSV/TXT file generated with all notes | Business Rule: Exports complete notes list | File Content: Note content, creator, timestamps |
6 | Verify Export Content: Check exported file structure | File Structure: CSV includes columns for content, creator, created date, updated date | Required Columns: Note_Content, Created_By, Created_At, Updated_At | Complete metadata export |
7 | Search + Export: Apply search filter then export | Filtered Export: Export respects active search criteria | Search Term: "maintenance", Expected: Only matching notes exported | Business Rule: Export respects search filters |
8 | Date Filter + Export: Apply date range filter then export | Date-Filtered Export: Export includes only notes within date range | Date Range: Last 30 days, Expected: Only recent notes exported | Business Rule: Export respects date filters |
9 | User Filter + Export: Apply creator filter then export | User-Filtered Export: Export includes only notes by selected user | Creator Filter: "John Smith", Expected: Only John's notes exported | Business Rule: Export respects user filters |
10 | Export Performance: Test export speed | Performance: Export completes within 5 seconds | Test: Large dataset (100+ notes) | Performance validation |
11 | Export File Format: Verify file format options | Format Options: CSV or TXT format available | Business Rule: Multiple export formats supported | Format flexibility |
12 | Empty Export: Test export with no results | Empty Export: Appropriate handling when no notes match criteria | Test: Search for non-existent term, then export | Empty state handling |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Header elements display correctly, Export button functional, Export respects filters
- Secondary_Verifications: File format appropriate, Performance acceptable, Empty states handled
- Negative_Verification: Export failures handled gracefully, Invalid filters managed, File corruption prevented
Test Case TC_033: Add New Note - Creation & Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_033
- Title: Add New Note Section - Text Input, Validation & Note Creation
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Data Entry/Business Logic
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Note-Creation, Text-Input-Validation, Character-Limits, Markdown-Support, Database-Operations, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Notes-Database]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 10 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Add New Note functionality
- Integration_Points: Notes Database, User Authentication, Timestamp Service
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Notes-Creation
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Operations
- Report_Categories: Notes-Management, Data-Entry, User-Experience
- Trend_Tracking: No
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Notes Database, User Authentication, Timestamp Service
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds note creation
- Data_Requirements: User authentication, system context
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Notes database active, User session authenticated
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with note creation rights
- Test_Data: Valid user session, test note content
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC_026 passed, notes header functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Text Area Display: Verify note input field | Input Field: Multi-line text area with placeholder "Add a new note..." | UI Element: Expandable text input | Primary input component |
2 | Character Limit: Test character limit enforcement | Limit Validation: Text area enforces 1000 character limit | Test Input: 1001 characters, Expected: Truncation or warning | Business Rule: Reasonable character limit |
3 | Character Counter: Verify character count display | Counter Display: Character count shown (e.g., "150/1000") | Live Counter: Updates as user types | User guidance |
4 | Empty State: Verify Add Note button disabled state | Button State: "Add Note" button disabled when text area is empty | Business Rule: Button disabled for empty input | Validation enforcement |
5 | Text Entry: Type note content | Button Activation: "Add Note" button becomes enabled when text is entered | Test Input: "Routine maintenance completed on main pump unit." | Input validation |
6 | Markdown Support: Test basic markdown formatting | Markdown Rendering: Bold, italics, lists supported (if configured) | Test Input: "Bold text, italic text, - List item" | Business Rule: Basic markdown support |
7 | Add Note Action: Click Add Note button | Note Creation: New note record created in database | Database Operation: INSERT INTO notes table | Note persistence |
8 | Database Record: Verify note attributes | Record Creation: Note created with correct attributes | Expected Fields: Note_Content, Parent_ID, Created_By, Created_At | Business Rule: Complete metadata capture |
9 | Parent ID Assignment: Verify system association | Parent Linking: Note associated with current system | Parent_ID: FILT-RSF-002 (current system) | Correct entity association |
10 | User Attribution: Verify creator assignment | User Assignment: Created_By field set to current user ID | Created_By: Current logged-in user ID | User tracking |
11 | Timestamp Generation: Verify creation timestamp | Timestamp: Created_At field set to server timestamp | Created_At: Current server time (YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS) | Accurate time tracking |
12 | Text Area Reset: Verify field clearing | Field Reset: Text area cleared after successful submission | Expected: Empty text area, placeholder visible | Clean state for next entry |
13 | Notes List Update: Verify new note appears | List Update: New note appears at top of notes list | Expected: Most recent note displayed first | Real-time list update |
14 | Chronological Order: Verify note ordering | Sort Order: Notes displayed chronologically, newest first | Business Rule: Most recent notes at top | Proper sorting |
15 | Concurrent Creation: Test multiple note creation | Sequential Creation: Multiple notes can be created in succession | Test: Create 3 notes rapidly | System responsiveness |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Notes created successfully, Database records accurate, Business rules enforced
- Secondary_Verifications: Character limits enforced, Markdown rendering works, List updates properly
- Negative_Verification: Empty submissions blocked, Character limits respected, Invalid input handled
Test Case TC_034: Notes List & Search/Filter - Display & Management
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_034
- Title: Notes List Display, Search/Filter & Edit Functionality
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Search/Edit/Display
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Planned-for-Automation
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Notes-List-Display, Search-Functionality, Note-Editing, Metadata-Display, Permission-Control, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Notes-Management]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Notes List functionality
- Integration_Points: Notes Database, Search Engine, User Authentication, Edit System
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-Notes-List
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Operations
- Report_Categories: Notes-Management, Search-Performance, Edit-Functionality
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Notes Database, Search Engine, User Management, Edit System
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second search response
- Data_Requirements: Multiple notes with different creators, timestamps, and content
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Notes database populated, Search indexing complete
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with notes access and edit permissions
- Test_Data: Notes from multiple users with various creation/update timestamps
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC_026 and TC_027 passed, notes created successfully
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Notes List Display: Verify chronological ordering | Sort Order: Notes displayed chronologically, most recent at top | Expected: Newest notes first | Business Rule: Chronological sorting |
2 | Note Content Display: Verify full text display | Content Display: Complete note text visible | Test Note: "Routine maintenance completed on main pump unit." | Full content visibility |
3 | Metadata Display: Verify creator and timestamp | Metadata Line: "Created by: [User Name] on [YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM]" | Formula: "Created by: John Smith on 2024-06-28 14:30" | Business Rule: Complete attribution |
4 | Updated Metadata: Verify edited note display | Update Display: "Updated by: [Editor's Name] on [YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM]" | Conditional: Only shown if Updated_At ≠ Created_At | Business Rule: Edit tracking |
5 | Search Box: Test real-time search | Dynamic Search: Notes list filters as user types | Search Term: "maintenance" | Business Rule: Real-time filtering |
6 | Content Search: Verify content matching | Search Results: Notes containing search term in content | Expected: Notes with "maintenance" in content | Content-based search |
7 | Creator Search: Test creator name matching | Search Results: Notes by creators matching search term | Search Term: "John" | Creator-based search |
8 | Filter Button: Open advanced filters | Filter Panel: Dropdown/modal with advanced filter options | Filter Options: Created By, Date Range | Advanced filtering interface |
9 | Created By Filter: Filter by note creator | User Filter: Searchable dropdown of all note creators | Selection: "John Smith" | Business Rule: Users who created notes in this entity |
10 | Date Range Filter: Filter by creation date | Date Filter: Start and end date picker for note creation | Date Range: Last 7 days | Temporal filtering |
11 | Combined Filters: Apply multiple filters | Complex Filtering: Notes matching both creator and date filters | Test: John Smith + Last 7 days | Multiple filter combination |
12 | Edit Icon Visibility: Verify edit permission | Edit Icon: Edit icon (✎) visible only to original author or admin | Business Rule: Permission-based visibility | Conditional Display: Author/admin only |
13 | Edit Action: Click edit icon | Edit Mode: Note content becomes editable in-place or modal | Test: Click edit on own note | Edit functionality |
14 | In-Place Editing: Test direct content editing | Edit Interface: Text becomes editable directly in list | Edit Mode: Content field becomes text input | Seamless editing experience |
15 | Save Edit: Complete note editing | Update Operation: Note_Content updated, Updated_By and Updated_At set | Database Update: Modified note saved with metadata | Edit persistence |
16 | Edit Metadata Update: Verify update tracking | Metadata Change: "Updated by" line appears after edit | Expected: Updated metadata line visible | Edit audit trail |
17 | Permission Test: Verify edit restrictions | Access Control: Edit icon hidden for notes by other users (non-admin) | Test: Other user's note should not show edit icon | Permission enforcement |
18 | Admin Override: Test admin edit permissions | Admin Access: Admin users can edit any note | Test: Admin user sees edit icon on all notes | Administrative privileges |
19 | Search Performance: Test search responsiveness | Performance: Search results update within 1 second | Test: Rapid typing in search box | Real-time performance |
20 | Empty Search Results: Test no-match scenario | Empty State: Appropriate "No notes found" message | Search Term: "NONEXISTENT123" | Empty state handling |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Notes display correctly, Search functions properly, Edit permissions enforced
- Secondary_Verifications: Metadata accurate, Performance acceptable, Filters work correctly
- Negative_Verification: Unauthorized edits blocked, Empty searches handled, Invalid input managed
Test Case TC_035: Activity Log Header - Title, Subtitle & Export Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_035
- Title: Activity Log Header - Title, Subtitle & Export Functionality
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Export/Header Validation
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Activity-Log-Management, Header-Validation, Export-Functionality, Timeline-Export, MOD-Systems, P2-High, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-Medium, Business-High, Revenue-Impact-Medium, Integration-Export-Service]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Support/Audit
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 6 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Activity Log Header functionality
- Integration_Points: Export Service, Activity Log Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-ActivityLog-Header
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Compliance
- Report_Categories: Audit-Trail, Data-Export, Compliance-Reporting
- Trend_Tracking: No
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Activity Log Database, Export Service
- Performance_Baseline: < 5 seconds export generation
- Data_Requirements: Activity log entries with various event types
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Activity logging active, Export service available
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with activity log access and export permissions
- Test_Data: Activity log entries with different types, users, timestamps
- Prior_Test_Cases: System detail view accessible, Activity Log tab functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: System Detail → Activity Log Tab | Activity Log tab loads with header section | URL: /systems/FILT-RSF-002/activity-log | Audit trail interface |
2 | Title Verification: Verify "Activity Log" title | Display: "Activity Log" clearly visible as section header | Title: "Activity Log" | Clear section identification |
3 | Subtitle Verification: Verify descriptive subtitle | Display: "Timeline of all activities and changes for this facility." | Business Rule: System-specific subtitle text | Contextual description |
4 | Export Button: Verify export button presence | Button Display: "Export" button visible and properly styled | Primary Action: Export button, right-aligned | Data export functionality |
5 | Export Button Click: Click Export button | Export Generation: CSV or plain text file generation initiated | Business Rule: Export respects active filters | File download trigger |
6 | Export Content Validation: Verify export file structure | Required Fields: Event type, timestamp, description, user/system | Business Rule: Must include all key activity metadata | Complete audit trail export |
7 | Export Performance: Measure export generation time | Performance: Export completes within 5 seconds | Benchmark: Large dataset export performance | Performance validation |
8 | Filtered Export: Apply filters then export | Export Respects Filters: Only filtered results included in export | Business Rule: Export honors active search/filter criteria | Filter-aware export |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Header elements display correctly, Export generates complete audit trail
- Secondary_Verifications: Export performance acceptable, File format appropriate
- Negative_Verification: Export handles large datasets, Filter integration works properly
Test Case TC_036: Activity Feed Search & Filter - Complete Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_036
- Title: Activity Feed Search & Filter - Real-time Search & Advanced Filtering
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Search/Filter
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Activity-Feed-Search, Advanced-Filtering, Real-Time-Search, Timeline-Filter, User-Filter, Date-Range-Filter, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Search-Engine]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage/Support
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 12 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Medium
- Failure_Impact: High
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Activity Feed Search & Filter functionality
- Integration_Points: Search Engine, Filter Engine, Activity Log Database
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-ActivityFeed-Search
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Operations
- Report_Categories: Search-Performance, Filter-Functionality, User-Experience
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Search Engine, Filter Engine, Activity Log Database
- Performance_Baseline: < 1 second search response
- Data_Requirements: Activity entries with various types, users, descriptions
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Search indexing complete, Filter system active
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with activity log access
- Test_Data: Activity log with Service Orders, Inspections, Failures, Maintenance, Compliance, Notes
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC_029 passed, Activity Log tab accessible
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Activity Log Tab → Search & Filter Bar | Search bar and filter button visible | UI Elements: Search input field, Filter button | Search interface |
2 | Search Placeholder: Verify search placeholder text | Display: "Search activities..." placeholder visible | UI Guidance: User-friendly placeholder | User guidance |
3 | Real-time Description Search: Type activity description | Dynamic Filtering: List filters to show matching descriptions | Search Term: "pump maintenance" | Business Rule: Dynamic filtering as user types |
4 | Search User/System Name: Type user name | Dynamic Filtering: List filters by associated user/system matches | Search Term: "John Smith" | User-based search validation |
5 | Filter Button: Click Filter button | Filter Panel: Modal/dropdown opens with advanced filter options | Filter Categories: Activity Type, User/Source, Date Range | Advanced filtering interface |
6 | Activity Type Filter: Select multiple event types | Multi-Select: Checkboxes for Service Order, Inspection, Failure, Maintenance, Compliance, Note Added, Asset Created | Selections: Check "Service Order" and "Maintenance" | Business Rule: Multi-select checklist |
7 | Apply Activity Type Filter: Apply selected types | Filtered Results: Only Service Order and Maintenance entries visible | Expected: Filtered activity log | Type-based filtering |
8 | User/Source Filter: Select user filter | Searchable Dropdown: All users and system sources available | Selection: "John Smith" and "System Alert" | User and system source filtering |
9 | Apply User Filter: Combine with Activity Type | Combined Filtering: Results match both Activity Type AND User/Source | Expected: Service Orders and Maintenance by John Smith or System Alert | Multiple filter combination |
10 | Date Range Filter: Set activity date range | Date Picker: Start and end date selection for activity timestamps | Date Range: Last 7 days (2025-08-14 to 2025-08-21) | Temporal filtering |
11 | Apply Date Range: Complete filter combination | Triple Filtering: Results match Activity Type, User/Source, AND Date Range | Expected: Recent activities matching all criteria | Complex filter validation |
12 | Search + Filter Combination: Type search with active filters | Integrated Filtering: Search applies to already filtered results | Search Term: "inspection" with active filters | Search-filter integration |
13 | Clear Search: Clear search input | Filter Persistence: Filters remain active, search cleared | Reset: Search cleared, filters active | Independent search/filter control |
14 | Clear All Filters: Remove all applied filters | Full Reset: Complete activity log returns | Action: Clear all filter selections | Complete reset functionality |
15 | Performance Test: Rapid search typing | Real-time Response: Search results update smoothly without lag | Test: Quick typing in search box | Performance validation |
16 | Empty Results: Search for non-existent activity | No Results: Appropriate "No activities found" message | Search Term: "NONEXISTENT_ACTIVITY" | Empty state handling |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Real-time search functional, Advanced filters apply correctly, Filter combinations work
- Secondary_Verifications: Performance acceptable, User interface responsive, Empty states handled
- Negative_Verification: Invalid filter combinations handled, Search performance scales, Date range validation
Test Case TC_037: Activity Log Entry Component - Complete Validation
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_037
- Title: Individual Activity Log Entry - Metadata, Display & Navigation Validation
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: August 20, 2025
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Functional/Data Display/Navigation
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags
Tags: [Happy-Path, Activity-Log-Entry, Metadata-Display, Navigation-Integration, Timeline-Component, Color-Coding, MOD-Systems, P1-Critical, Phase-Regression, Type-Functional, Platform-Web, Report-Engineering, Customer-Enterprise, Risk-High, Business-Critical, Revenue-Impact-High, Integration-Multi-Module]
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage/Support
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100% of Activity Log Entry functionality
- Integration_Points: Activity Log Database, Service Orders, Alerts, Inspections, User Directory
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-ActivityEntry
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering/Operations/Compliance
- Report_Categories: Audit-Trail, Navigation-Integration, Data-Integrity
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: Critical
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Activity Log Database, All integrated modules (Service Orders, Alerts, etc.)
- Performance_Baseline: < 2 seconds navigation response
- Data_Requirements: Complete activity log entries with all metadata types
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: All integrated modules active, Complete activity data available
- User_Roles_Permissions: Plant Supervisor with access to all referenced modules
- Test_Data: Activity entries for Service Orders, Inspections, Failures, Maintenance, Compliance, Notes
- Prior_Test_Cases: TC_029 and TC_030 passed, all integrated modules accessible
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Navigation: Activity Log Tab → Activity Feed | Chronological list of activity entries displays | Sorting: Most recent entries at top | Business Rule: Reverse chronological order |
2 | Service Order Entry: Verify Service Order activity | Activity Type Tag: Blue "Service Order" tag, Primary Description: "Created service order SO-001 for pump maintenance" | Data Source: Service Order creation event | Formula: System-generated string from event data |
3 | Service Order Timestamp: Verify timestamp format | Format: YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM (e.g., 2024-06-28 14:30) | Data Source: created_at from source record | Tooltip: "Event Timestamp - The exact date and time this activity was recorded in the system." |
4 | Service Order Secondary Description: Verify additional details | Secondary Description: "Scheduled preventive maintenance for main pump unit" | Data Source: Additional details from source event | Non-bolded contextual information |
5 | Service Order User/Source: Verify user attribution | User Display: "John Smith" (if user-initiated) | Data Source: user_id from source event record | Business Rule: Full name display for users |
6 | Inspection Entry: Verify Inspection activity | Activity Type Tag: Green "Inspection" tag, Primary Description: "Completed routine inspection of filtration system" | Data Source: Inspection completion event | Color-coded by activity type |
7 | Inspection Secondary Description: Verify inspection details | Secondary Description: "All parameters within acceptable ranges" | Data Source: Inspection results summary | Formula: Generated from inspection data |
8 | Failure Entry: Verify Failure activity | Activity Type Tag: Red "Failure" tag, Primary Description: "Reported failure in control valve C3" | Data Source: Failure alert generation | Critical event color coding |
9 | Failure User/Source: Verify system source attribution | System Source: "System Alert" (if automated) | Data Source: source_system from event record | Business Rule: System source for automated events |
10 | Maintenance Entry: Verify Maintenance activity | Activity Type Tag: Purple "Maintenance" tag, Primary Description: "Completed filter replacement in treatment unit B2" | Data Source: Maintenance work completion | Maintenance-specific color |
11 | Compliance Entry: Verify Compliance activity | Activity Type Tag: Orange "Compliance" tag, Primary Description: "Water quality monitoring - July 2025" | Data Source: Compliance report generation | Compliance-specific color |
12 | Note Entry: Verify Note activity | Activity Type Tag: Gray "Note" tag, Primary Description: "New filtration system installed successfully" | Data Source: Note creation event | User-generated content |
13 | Clickable Entry Test: Click Service Order entry | Navigation: Redirects to detailed SO-001 page | Business Rule: Dynamic link from event_type and source_record_id | URL: /service-orders/SO-001 |
14 | Navigation Verification: Verify correct Service Order page | Page Content: Service Order SO-001 details displayed | Integration: Proper navigation to source record | Cross-module navigation |
15 | Return Navigation: Navigate back to Activity Log | Navigation: Return to Activity Log tab | Browser Back: Maintain activity log state | Navigation state preservation |
16 | Failure Entry Click: Click Failure entry | Navigation: Redirects to specific alert in Alerts tab | Business Rule: Navigate to source alert | URL: /systems/FILT-RSF-002/alerts#alert-id |
17 | Inspection Entry Click: Click Inspection entry | Navigation: Redirects to detailed inspection report | Business Rule: Navigate to inspection details | Cross-tab navigation |
18 | Tooltip Validation: Hover over Activity Type tag | Tooltip: "Activity Type - The category of this log entry, based on where the event originated in the system." | UI Feedback: Contextual help information | User guidance |
19 | Tooltip Validation: Hover over Timestamp | Tooltip: "Event Timestamp - The exact date and time this activity was recorded in the system." | UI Feedback: Timestamp explanation | Time context |
20 | Tooltip Validation: Hover over User/Source | Tooltip: "Event Source - The user or system process that generated this activity log entry." | UI Feedback: Source explanation | Attribution context |
21 | Color Coding Verification: Verify all activity type colors | Color Validation: Service Order=Blue, Inspection=Green, Failure=Red, Maintenance=Purple, Compliance=Orange, Note=Gray | Visual Design: Consistent color scheme | Color coding system |
22 | Data Integrity: Verify metadata accuracy | Data Consistency: All displayed data matches source records | Validation: Cross-reference with source tables | Data accuracy verification |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: All activity metadata displays correctly, Color coding accurate, Navigation functional
- Secondary_Verifications: Tooltips informative, Data integrity maintained, Performance acceptable
- Negative_Verification: Handle missing source records gracefully, Navigation errors managed, Invalid data handled
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX-Systems-ServiceOrders-Table
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Test Case TC_032: Cross-Browser Compatibility Testing
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_032
- Title: Verify Systems Management Functionality Across Multiple Browsers
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: 2025-01-18
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Compatibility
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P3-Medium
- Execution Phase: Acceptance
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: All
- Revenue_Impact: Low
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: No
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Low
- Complexity_Level: Medium
- Expected_Execution_Time: 20 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Low
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 80%
- Integration_Points: Browser-APIs, JavaScript-Engine, CSS-Rendering
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX02
- Requirement_Coverage: Partial
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: QA
- Report_Categories: Compatibility-Testing, Browser-Support
- Trend_Tracking: No
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: Medium
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+, Firefox 118+, Safari 16+, Edge 118+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11, macOS 12+
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080, Desktop-1366x768
- Dependencies: Multiple browser installations, web driver services
- Performance_Baseline: Consistent across all browsers
- Data_Requirements: Same test data across all browser tests
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Multiple browsers installed and configured
- User_Roles_Permissions: Standard user account
- Test_Data: Standard system registry data
- Prior_Test_Cases: Core functionality validated in primary browser
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Chrome 115+ Testing |
|
| Primary browser baseline |
2 | Load systems registry page | Page renders correctly | N/A | Layout verification |
3 | Verify KPI cards functionality | All cards clickable and data accurate | 10 systems total | Interactive elements |
4 | Test search and filter features | Real-time filtering works | Search: "SYS-001" | JavaScript functionality |
5 | Open Add New System wizard | Multi-step wizard opens properly | N/A | Modal and form rendering |
6 | Test map integration | Map loads and pin placement works | N/A | Third-party integration |
7 | Navigate to system detail view | All tabs load correctly | System: FILT-RSF-002 | Tab navigation |
8 | Firefox 118+ Testing |
|
| Mozilla compatibility |
9 | Repeat steps 2-7 in Firefox | Identical functionality to Chrome | Same test data | Cross-browser consistency |
10 | Verify CSS rendering differences | Layouts match design specifications | N/A | Visual consistency |
11 | Test performance tab charts | Charts render correctly | N/A | Chart.js compatibility |
12 | Safari 16+ Testing |
|
| WebKit compatibility |
13 | Repeat core functionality tests | All features work in Safari | Same test data | Apple browser support |
14 | Test file upload functionality | Upload works correctly | Test PDF file | File API support |
15 | Verify date picker widgets | Date controls function properly | N/A | Native input support |
16 | Edge 118+ Testing |
|
| Microsoft browser |
17 | Repeat full test suite | Complete functionality verified | Same test data | Chromium-based testing |
18 | Responsive Design Testing |
|
| Mobile compatibility |
19 | Test tablet view (1024x768) | Responsive layout adapts | N/A | CSS media queries |
20 | Test mobile view (375x667) | Mobile-optimized interface | N/A | Touch interface |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: All core functionality works consistently across supported browsers
- Secondary_Verifications:
- Visual layouts remain consistent
- JavaScript features function properly
- File upload and form submissions work
- Performance remains acceptable
- Negative_Verification: No browser-specific errors or broken functionality
Test Case TC_011: API Integration Testing
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_011
- Title: Verify Systems Management API Endpoints and Data Integration
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: 2025-01-18
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: API
- Test Level: Integration
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Regression
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 15 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 100%
- Integration_Points: Database, SCADA-API, External-Services
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX02
- Requirement_Coverage: Complete
- Cross_Platform_Support: Both
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: API-Testing, Integration-Validation
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: No
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Staging
- Browser/Version: API Testing Tool (Postman/REST Client)
- Device/OS: Any
- Screen_Resolution: N/A
- Dependencies: API gateway, database, authentication service
- Performance_Baseline: API response < 500ms
- Data_Requirements: Valid authentication tokens, test data sets
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: API testing environment configured
- User_Roles_Permissions: API access credentials
- Test_Data: Valid system data payloads, authentication tokens
- Prior_Test_Cases: Authentication APIs working
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Authentication Testing |
|
| Security validation |
2 | POST /api/auth/login | Authentication token received | Valid credentials | Bearer token |
3 | GET /api/systems without auth | 401 Unauthorized response | No token | Security check |
4 | Systems CRUD Operations |
|
| Core API functionality |
5 | GET /api/systems | List of systems returned | N/A | Read operation |
6 | Verify response structure | Correct JSON schema | Standard response format | Data validation |
7 | GET /api/systems/{id} | Specific system details | System ID: FILT-RSF-002 | Single record |
8 | POST /api/systems | New system created | Complete system payload | Create operation |
9 | Verify created system | System appears in database | N/A | Persistence check |
10 | PUT /api/systems/{id} | System updated successfully | Modified system data | Update operation |
11 | DELETE /api/systems/{id} | System soft deleted | Test system ID | Delete operation |
12 | Performance Metrics API |
|
| Real-time data |
13 | GET /api/systems/{id}/performance | Performance metrics returned | System ID | Live data |
14 | Verify metric calculations | Correct formula results | Capacity utilization = 90.4% | Business logic |
15 | GET /api/systems/{id}/alerts | Active alerts returned | System with alerts | Alert integration |
16 | Compliance API Testing |
|
| Regulatory data |
17 | GET /api/systems/{id}/compliance | Compliance data returned | System with compliance data | Water quality |
18 | POST /api/systems/{id}/compliance/calculate | Monthly compliance calculated | Compliance period | Calculation API |
19 | Asset Association API |
|
| Relationship management |
20 | GET /api/systems/{id}/assets | Associated assets returned | System with assets | Asset listing |
21 | POST /api/systems/{id}/assets | Asset associated with system | Asset ID to associate | Create relationship |
22 | DELETE /api/systems/{id}/assets/{assetId} | Asset removed from system | Existing association | Remove relationship |
23 | Financial API Testing |
|
| Financial calculations |
24 | GET /api/systems/{id}/financials | Financial data returned | System with financial data | Book value data |
25 | POST /api/systems/{id}/financials/calculate | Depreciation calculated | Calculation trigger | Financial processing |
26 | Error Handling Testing |
|
| Negative scenarios |
27 | GET /api/systems/invalid-id | 404 Not Found response | Non-existent ID | Error handling |
28 | POST /api/systems with invalid data | 400 Bad Request response | Invalid payload | Data validation |
29 | PUT /api/systems/{id} with partial data | Partial update successful | Minimal required fields | Flexible updates |
30 | Performance Testing |
|
| Load validation |
31 | Concurrent GET requests | All requests successful | 10 concurrent calls | Concurrency handling |
32 | Measure response times | All responses < 500ms | N/A | Performance verification |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: All API endpoints return correct data with proper HTTP status codes
- Secondary_Verifications:
- Authentication and authorization work correctly
- CRUD operations persist data accurately
- Performance metrics calculations are correct
- Error handling provides meaningful responses
- Negative_Verification: Invalid requests rejected with appropriate error codes
Test Case TC_012: Performance and Load Testing
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_012
- Title: Verify Systems Management Performance Under Load Conditions
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: 2025-01-18
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Performance
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P2-High
- Execution Phase: Performance
- Automation Status: Automated
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: Medium
- Business_Priority: Should-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: No
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: Medium
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 30 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: Medium
- Data_Sensitivity: Low
- Failure_Impact: Medium
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 60%
- Integration_Points: Database, SCADA-Integration, Real-time-Processing
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX02
- Requirement_Coverage: Performance-Requirements
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: Engineering
- Report_Categories: Performance-Testing, Scalability-Analysis
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Performance testing environment with load generation capability
- User_Roles_Permissions: Multiple test user accounts
- Test_Data: 1000+ systems, 10,000+ assets, historical performance data
- Prior_Test_Cases: Functional validation complete
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Baseline Performance Testing |
|
| Single user baseline |
2 | Load systems registry page | Page loads within 3 seconds | 1000 systems | Performance baseline |
3 | Measure dashboard load time | KPI cards populate within 2 seconds | Real-time data | Data loading |
4 | Test search functionality | Search results within 1 second | Various search terms | Real-time filtering |
5 | Load system detail page | Detail view loads within 2 seconds | Complex system | Data complexity |
6 | Concurrent User Testing |
|
| Multi-user load |
7 | Simulate 10 concurrent users | All users can access simultaneously | 10 user sessions | Light load |
8 | Monitor response times | Response times remain under baseline | N/A | Performance monitoring |
9 | Simulate 50 concurrent users | System handles moderate load | 50 user sessions | Moderate load |
10 | Check database performance | Database queries remain optimized | N/A | Backend performance |
11 | Simulate 100 concurrent users | System performance degrades gracefully | 100 user sessions | Heavy load |
12 | Monitor memory usage | Memory consumption stays within limits | N/A | Resource monitoring |
13 | Stress Testing |
|
| Breaking point analysis |
14 | Gradually increase load | Find system breaking point | Incrementally increase users | Stress analysis |
15 | Monitor error rates | Error rate stays below 1% | N/A | Error threshold |
16 | Test system recovery | System recovers when load decreases | Reduce concurrent users | Recovery testing |
17 | Database Performance |
|
| Backend scalability |
18 | Test large dataset queries | Queries complete within SLA | 10,000+ records | Data volume |
19 | Monitor database connections | Connection pool management | N/A | Resource management |
20 | Test complex calculations | Criticality calculations perform adequately | Multiple concurrent calculations | Computational load |
21 | Real-time Data Testing |
|
| SCADA integration load |
22 | Simulate high data volume | Real-time updates don't degrade performance | High frequency SCADA data | Data throughput |
23 | Test alert processing | Alert processing remains responsive | Multiple simultaneous alerts | Alert system load |
24 | Memory and Resource Testing |
|
| Resource utilization |
25 | Monitor memory leaks | Memory usage remains stable | Extended test duration | Memory management |
26 | Check CPU utilization | CPU usage within acceptable limits | Peak load conditions | Processing efficiency |
27 | Test garbage collection | GC doesn't impact user experience | N/A | Runtime performance |
28 | Browser Performance Testing |
|
| Client-side performance |
29 | Test with large datasets | Browser handles large tables efficiently | 1000+ table rows | Client rendering |
30 | Monitor JavaScript performance | No UI freezing or blocking | Complex interactions | Client responsiveness |
31 | Network Performance |
|
| Connectivity impact |
32 | Test slow network conditions | System remains usable on slow connections | Simulated slow network | Connectivity resilience |
33 | Test network interruptions | Graceful handling of connection issues | Network simulation | Error resilience |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: System maintains acceptable performance under expected load conditions
- Secondary_Verifications:
- Response times stay within SLA requirements
- System scales appropriately with increased load
- Resource utilization remains within acceptable limits
- Error rates stay below threshold levels
- Negative_Verification: System doesn't crash under stress, graceful degradation occurs
Test Case TC_013: Security and Access Control Testing
Test Case Metadata
- Test Case ID: AX02US02_TC_013
- Title: Verify Security Controls and Role-Based Access Management
- Created By: Prachi
- Created Date: 2025-01-18
- Version: 1.0
Classification
- Module/Feature: Systems Management (AX02US02)
- Test Type: Security
- Test Level: System
- Priority: P1-Critical
- Execution Phase: Security
- Automation Status: Manual
Enhanced Tags for 17 Reports Support
Business Context
- Customer_Segment: Enterprise
- Revenue_Impact: High
- Business_Priority: Must-Have
- Customer_Journey: Daily-Usage
- Compliance_Required: Yes
- SLA_Related: Yes
Quality Metrics
- Risk_Level: High
- Complexity_Level: High
- Expected_Execution_Time: 25 minutes
- Reproducibility_Score: High
- Data_Sensitivity: High
- Failure_Impact: Critical
Coverage Tracking
- Feature_Coverage: 90%
- Integration_Points: Authentication-Service, Authorization-Engine, Audit-Logging
- Code_Module_Mapped: AX02
- Requirement_Coverage: Security-Requirements
- Cross_Platform_Support: Web
Stakeholder Reporting
- Primary_Stakeholder: QA
- Report_Categories: Security-Testing, Compliance-Validation
- Trend_Tracking: Yes
- Executive_Visibility: Yes
- Customer_Impact_Level: High
Requirements Traceability
Test Environment
- Environment: Security-Testing
- Browser/Version: Chrome 115+
- Device/OS: Windows 10/11
- Screen_Resolution: Desktop-1920x1080
- Dependencies: Authentication service, authorization engine, audit logging system
- Performance_Baseline: Security checks < 200ms additional overhead
- Data_Requirements: Multiple user roles, sensitive system data
Prerequisites
- Setup_Requirements: Multiple user accounts with different roles configured
- User_Roles_Permissions:
- Asset Manager (full access)
- Plant Supervisor (operational access)
- Read-Only User (view-only access)
- Unauthorized User (no access)
- Test_Data: Sensitive system information, financial data, compliance records
- Prior_Test_Cases: User management system functional
Test Procedure
Step # | Action | Expected Result | Test Data | Comments |
1 | Authentication Testing |
|
| Login security |
2 | Attempt login with valid credentials | Successful authentication | Asset Manager account | Valid login |
3 | Attempt login with invalid password | Authentication failure | Wrong password | Security validation |
4 | Attempt login with non-existent user | Authentication failure | Invalid username | Account validation |
5 | Test session timeout | Automatic logout after inactivity | 30 minutes idle | Session management |
6 | Test concurrent session limits | Appropriate session handling | Multiple logins | Session control |
7 | Asset Manager Role Testing |
|
| Full access validation |
8 | Access systems registry | Full access granted | N/A | Read permissions |
9 | Create new system | System creation successful | Complete system data | Write permissions |
10 | Modify existing system | Update successful | System modifications | Edit permissions |
11 | Delete system | Deletion successful with confirmation | Test system | Delete permissions |
12 | Access financial data | Full financial information visible | System book values | Sensitive data access |
13 | Calculate depreciation | Financial calculations allowed | Depreciation trigger | Administrative functions |
14 | View compliance reports | Complete compliance data accessible | Water quality data | Regulatory information |
15 | Plant Supervisor Role Testing |
|
| Operational access |
16 | Login as Plant Supervisor | Successful authentication | Supervisor account | Role-based login |
17 | Access systems registry | Read access granted | N/A | Operational visibility |
18 | View system performance | Performance data accessible | Real-time metrics | Operational data |
19 | Access alerts tab | Alert management available | Active alerts | Operational control |
20 | Attempt system creation | Access denied or limited | N/A | Write restriction |
21 | Try to access financial data | Limited or no financial access | Book values hidden | Financial restriction |
22 | Access compliance monitoring | Compliance data available | Water quality readings | Operational compliance |
23 | Read-Only User Testing |
|
| View-only access |
24 | Login as Read-Only user | Successful authentication | Read-only account | Limited access login |
25 | View systems registry | Read-only access granted | N/A | View permissions |
26 | Attempt to edit system | Edit buttons disabled/hidden | N/A | Write prevention |
27 | Try to create new system | Add button not available | N/A | Create prevention |
28 | Attempt to delete system | Delete options not accessible | N/A | Delete prevention |
29 | View performance data | Read access to performance metrics | N/A | Operational visibility |
30 | Try to calculate compliance | Calculation buttons disabled | N/A | Administrative prevention |
31 | Unauthorized Access Testing |
|
| Security boundaries |
32 | Direct URL access without login | Redirect to login page | Protected URLs | URL protection |
33 | API access without authentication | 401 Unauthorized response | Direct API calls | API security |
34 | Session hijacking attempt | Security measures prevent access | Invalid session tokens | Session security |
35 | Data Protection Testing |
|
| Information security |
36 | Verify sensitive data masking | Financial data appropriately hidden | Salary/cost information | Data sensitivity |
37 | Check audit trail logging | User actions logged appropriately | All user interactions | Audit compliance |
38 | Test data export restrictions | Export limited by role | Financial data export | Data loss prevention |
39 | Input Validation and XSS Prevention |
|
| Injection protection |
40 | Test XSS in system name field | Script tags sanitized | <script>alert('xss')</script> | XSS prevention |
41 | Test SQL injection in search | Database protected from injection | ' OR '1'='1 | SQL injection prevention |
42 | Test file upload security | Only allowed file types accepted | Malicious file types | Upload security |
43 | Password and Credential Security |
|
| Credential protection |
44 | Test password complexity requirements | Strong password required | Weak passwords rejected | Password policy |
45 | Verify password encryption | Passwords not stored in plain text | N/A | Credential security |
46 | Test multi-factor authentication | Additional security layer works | MFA codes | Enhanced authentication |
Verification Points
- Primary_Verification: Role-based access controls prevent unauthorized actions and data access
- Secondary_Verifications:
- Authentication mechanisms work correctly
- Session management is secure
- Input validation prevents injection attacks
- Audit trails capture all security-relevant actions
- Negative_Verification: Unauthorized users cannot access protected resources, malicious inputs are rejected