Four short steps — incident, asset, evidence, and a summary to review before you send anything. Nothing here commits you to anything, and every question explains why it's being asked. This organizes what you already know; it doesn't yet analyze it — that's a technical assessment's job.
1
2
3
4
The Incident
Start with what happened — this determines which follow-up questions actually matter for your situation.
This is used only to organize the questions that follow — a flood incident and a mechanical failure need different follow-up detail.
How recently this happened affects how time-sensitive some evidence still is.
If your situation is still active or unsafe, we'll point you to an Emergency Guide alongside this assessment, not instead of it.
This helps frame urgency in your own operational terms — it doesn't change any technical finding.
The Asset
Only equipment type is needed to continue — the rest sharpens the assessment but is entirely optional.
This is the one asset field we actually need — everything else below just adds precision.
Manufacturer, model, power, and voltage help identify which standards would apply later — none of this is required to continue.
Evidence
Add whatever you already have — photos, a description, any readings. Nothing here is required; the reminder below just shows what's still missing so you know where you stand.
Information collected:0 of 5 information areas covereda count, not an engineering assessment
Photos
Click to add photos
Photos stay in this browser only — nothing is uploaded anywhere at this stage.
Documents Available
Just tell us what you have — you don't need to attach these files yet.
Incident Description
Known Measurements
Type
Value
Date
Engineering Summary
A plain readback of what you've entered — nothing analyzed or concluded yet. Check it over, then choose what to do next.
Compiling your summary…
See This as a Simplified Engineering Workflow
The three sections below use transparent, rule-based logic to show what a qualification and a preliminary engineering read would look like from what you've entered — a demonstration of how SRT-EOS reasons, not an actual engineering assessment or AI analysis. A real PEDR™ requires a qualified engineer's review.
Engineering Qualification
A simplified, rule-based read of priority and response level — see how each conclusion was reached below.
Engineering Decision Preview
Never a Repair / Replace / Retrofit verdict — only confidence, risk categories, and what to do next.
PEDR™ Preview
An on-screen preview only — no file is generated at this stage.
