From spec sheet to a defensible test plan.

Three ways validation teams make coverage visible before the lab books. Platform where it scales, engineers where judgment is required.

Book a briefing Start the demo
Spec 2847-B · path3 stations
  1. SpecSpec sheet · 186 clausesPlanTest plan · 168 coveredOK
  2. Plan9 gaps flaggedLabTest center · sequenceOK
  3. LabReports v3EvidenceTraceability · 9 openGap
Excerpt · demo data

Context

Three ways to make coverage visible

Validation teams often book the lab before the spec sits cleanly on tests. These use cases show the same core in three cuts: spec to plan, coverage before booking, flow in three steps.

Test plan from OEM spec sheet is the core: free text and tables become requirements with ID, standard reference and acceptance. Battery validation keeps the eye on cell/module/pack and mandatory standards before samples hit the institute. Validation planning is the operating flow, including Arc when parallel institutes are needed.

Standards the plan has to carry live under Standards.

FAQ

Questions on the use cases

How spec, coverage and the lab sequence fit together.

What is Cevelar's core use case?

Build an auditable test plan from an OEM spec: extract requirements, map them to standards and OEM addenda, flag gaps, estimate sequence and cost.

Why coverage before the lab?

Lab time is expensive. Spec gaps (missing acceptance, unclear DUT level, OEM hardening without an evidence path) show up there when rescheduling hurts. Coverage first makes the gaps cheap.

How does planning in three steps work?

Upload the spec, structured requirements plus a gap matrix, then a plan with traceability for ALM and the lab. Platform where it scales, engineers where judgement is needed.

What does Cevelar actually deliver?

Structured requirements with source and clause references, coverage gaps, a bookable plan. Accredited institutes run the tests; Arc orchestrates parallel campaigns. EU-hosted in Frankfurt.