01: Identity
01
Equipment
One machine, one record
Build the record one unit at a time: identify the equipment, review its nameplate fields, resolve repeat captures and document its observed condition.
MEP equipment survey software captures each installed unit as a record: reading the nameplate, estimating age where the date information supports it, consolidating repeat captures of the same machine, and keeping source photos with the equipment record.
The unit is the atom
Everything downstream — the schedule, the count, the capital plan, the asset register — assumes one row means one machine. Duplicate captures can make that count unreliable. A rooftop unit shot from four sides with two sub-plates produces six images; unless something reconciles them, it produces six rows.
Getting the unit right means three separate problems: reading the plate, deciding which captures are the same machine, and dating it. Clear photographs help, but identity and age still need supporting evidence.
Deciding what is the same machine
01: Serial number
02: Unit tag
03: Model + room
04: Model alone
| Signal | Weight | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Serial number | Strongest | Strong evidence when manufacturer, model and plate context also agree |
| Unit tag | Strong | Reliable where the site follows a tagging convention |
| Model + room | Moderate | Weak where identical units sit in a row |
| Model alone | Weak | Needs corroboration on plant with many identical machines |
Merging that can be undone
Strong evidence merges. Suggestive evidence is raised as a finding for a person to confirm. The difference matters: a wrong merge destroys a unit that existed, and it is nearly undetectable afterwards because the row it should have occupied is simply absent.
When captures do merge, the identity keys of both are kept, so a unit photographed under two different tags can still be found under either.
What gets captured per unit
02: Electrical rating
02
Electrical rating
03: Capacity
03
Capacity
04: Age
04
Age
05: Condition
05
Condition
06: Place in the system
06
Place in the system
Condition, proposed and then owned
Judgements belong to engineers. A rating is proposed with the evidence it came from, and a person accepts it or replaces it. The record should make that distinction clear, so a reader can tell an accepted rating from a pending suggestion.
For the fields worth capturing on each equipment type, see the equipment survey checklist.
How captures become one unit
How does it know six photographs are the same machine?
Identity evidence. A serial number that matches, a tag that matches, the same model in the same room — those are the signals that two captures are one unit. Where the evidence is strong the captures merge into a single record; where it is only suggestive the pair is raised for a person to decide.
Why does the serial number matter so much?
The serial helps identify a unit and may support a manufacturer-specific date lookup. Record any printed manufacture date too. Age alone does not establish condition or remaining service life.
Is the condition rating automatic?
A suggested rating needs engineer review against the available observations. Record the basis for the assessment and any limitations; a photograph cannot establish the full operating condition of equipment.
What about equipment with several nameplates?
Large units often carry more than one plate — a unit plate, a compressor plate, a fan motor plate. They are captured against the same unit, so the motor rating and the unit rating live on one record.