Checklist · Site acceptance
Site acceptance test checklist for installed industrial equipment
Last updated
A site acceptance test, or SAT, is the last practical opportunity to confirm that industrial equipment performs to its contractual specification in the place it will actually operate. It is run at the buyer’s site, after the equipment has been delivered, installed and commissioned, under real power, the real process medium and full integration with the surrounding plant. That makes it distinct from the factory acceptance test, which is run at the supplier’s factory before shipment, under factory utilities and simulated conditions. The FAT proves the equipment was built right; the SAT proves it works where it has to work.
If you are deciding how to split the two tests in the purchase contract, or why a package that passed FAT can still fail on site, start with factory acceptance test vs site acceptance test. To build the factory-side record this SAT is checked against, use the factory acceptance test checklist.
The factory, site and integration acceptance tests — FAT, SAT and SIT — are formally defined for process-automation systems in IEC/ANSI/ISA 62381 (and the ISA-105 commissioning series), while the specific tests a given unit must pass come from its own category standards (IEC, ASME, API or IEEE). The checklist below is the working artefact for the site test: the sections a buyer can copy into a project file, a SAT protocol or an acceptance report.
When to use this SAT checklist
Use this checklist when accepting engineered, semi-custom or project-specific industrial equipment at site, particularly equipment sourced from China and shipped across an ocean. It is especially useful when:
- The equipment has contractual performance guarantees that can only be proven on the real process at site.
- The package is installed by a local contractor and integrated with equipment from other vendors.
- Site utilities — power quality, water, air, ambient — differ from the conditions the equipment was tested under at the factory.
- SAT acceptance releases final payment, starts the warranty or transfers care, custody and control.
- A factory acceptance test checklist was already used before shipment, and the site team needs to close the acceptance chain against that record.
The SAT protocol and acceptance criteria should be agreed before the equipment ships, ideally attached to the purchase contract as an annex, not negotiated on site once the equipment is running.
The site acceptance test checklist in full
The twelve sections below can be copied into a project file, a SAT protocol, a commissioning pack or an acceptance report. Each section closes with a procurement-control point: the principle a buyer should not let schedule pressure or a demobilising supplier compromise.
Before SAT is scheduled
Confirm that installation and commissioning are actually complete before mobilising the buyer’s engineers, the supplier’s commissioning engineer or a third-party witness to site. A SAT run against an unfinished installation produces a punch list, not an acceptance.
- Installation and mechanical completion are signed off by the installing contractor.
- Commissioning is complete, or at the agreed state of readiness for witnessed testing.
- All FAT punch items due before energisation or site testing are closed and evidenced.
- The approved SAT protocol and acceptance criteria are agreed and issued before the test date.
- Site utilities the equipment needs — power, water, air, drainage, effluent — are available at the required capacity.
- The real process medium, feedstock or load required for the performance run is available.
- Calibrated site instruments and any special test equipment are available.
- The supplier’s commissioning engineer and the buyer’s witness are confirmed for the same window.
- Interfacing vendors are available where cross-boundary functions or safety circuits will be tested.
- Permits to work, isolation and site safety clearances for the test are in place.
- The FAT report and document pack are on site as the acceptance baseline.
Documents to have on site before SAT
The SAT is checked against documents, not memory. Assemble the acceptance baseline on site before the test so every result can be verified against an approved reference.
- Approved SAT protocol and acceptance criteria.
- Signed FAT report, test records and the FAT punch list with closure evidence.
- Purchase order, technical specification and the contractual documentation list.
- Approved general arrangement and installation drawings.
- As-built electrical, control, piping and instrumentation drawings.
- Utility and interface schedule agreed at design review.
- Calibration certificates for the site test instruments.
- Commissioning records and pre-SAT check sheets.
- Operation and maintenance manuals.
- Spare-parts and commissioning-spares lists.
- Serial-number and nameplate records to match against the delivered unit.
- Warranty terms and the acceptance-certificate template.
SAT protocol and acceptance criteria
A SAT without acceptance criteria is a commissioning demonstration. Before the test, both sides should define what is measured, under what site conditions, and what result is acceptable.
- The SAT scope is defined and distinguished from FAT scope already accepted.
- Each test has a measurable acceptance criterion traceable to the contract.
- Contractual performance parameters and the process medium are specified.
- The performance-run duration and the conditions to be held are defined.
- The site conditions to be recorded are listed: voltage, frequency, ambient, feed quality.
- The instruments and data-logging method are identified.
- Interfaces and safety circuits to be proven across vendor boundaries are listed.
- Re-test rules and root-cause responsibility are defined for failed items.
- Punch-item categories and their closure gates are agreed.
- Criteria for acceptance, conditional acceptance and hold are agreed.
Delivered condition and identity
Before crediting any site result, confirm that the installed unit is the one accepted at FAT and that it survived transport and storage intact.
- Serial numbers and nameplate data match the FAT report and the purchase order.
- Model, configuration and options match the list approved at FAT.
- No transport damage, deformation or corrosion is visible on inspection.
- Preservation state on arrival is checked: seals, desiccant, protective covers, blanking.
- Machined surfaces, open nozzles and glands were protected in transit.
- Completeness is checked against the packing list and the pre-shipment record.
- Items removed for transport are all present for reassembly.
- Storage conditions between arrival and installation are recorded where relevant.
- Any deviation from the FAT-accepted condition is photographed and logged.
Installation and mechanical completion
Site performance depends on installation the factory never saw. Confirm the equipment is set, connected and reassembled correctly before functional testing.
- Foundation, anchoring and grouting match the approved installation drawing.
- Levelling and alignment are within tolerance and recorded.
- Items disassembled for transport are reassembled per the supplier’s instructions.
- Piping, ducting and cable connections match the as-built drawings.
- Pipe stress, expansion and support arrangements are checked where relevant.
- Rotating-equipment alignment and cold or hot checks are completed where applicable.
- Guarding, covers and safety devices removed for installation are reinstated.
- Lubrication, fill levels and first-fill consumables are correct.
- Earthing, bonding and cable marking are checked against drawings.
- Torqueing, fastening and commissioning check sheets are signed off.
Site utilities as found
The FAT ran on factory utilities. The SAT proves the equipment against the utilities actually available at site, measured on the day, not the datasheet values.
- Supply voltage, frequency and phase are measured at the equipment terminals.
- Power quality — dips, imbalance, harmonics — is checked where the equipment is sensitive.
- Generator or interruptible-supply behaviour is recorded where site power is not firm.
- Compressed-air pressure, flow and dryness meet the equipment’s requirement.
- Cooling water, chilled water or process water quality and pressure are verified.
- Drainage, effluent and venting provisions match the design.
- Ambient temperature, humidity and, where relevant, altitude and dust are recorded.
- Available utility capacity is confirmed against the equipment’s peak demand.
- Any shortfall against the utility schedule is logged before testing proceeds.
Function as installed
The sequences and protections proven at FAT are re-run at site with real power and field wiring in place. The simulations used at the factory are removed.
- Equipment identification is confirmed before functional testing starts.
- Start, stop, reset, changeover and operating modes are demonstrated on site power.
- Control sequences run against the project control philosophy, not a factory demonstration.
- Interlocks, permissives and trips are proven with real field signals.
- Emergency stops and safety functions are tested in place.
- Alarms and indications are checked with the plant control system live.
- Field instruments read correctly and are on their site calibration.
- Actual measured values are recorded, not only pass or fail marks.
- Abnormal stops, resets or adjustments during testing are logged.
- Failed items are re-tested only after corrective action is evidenced.
Performance run on the real process
This is what the SAT can prove and the FAT cannot: sustained contractual performance on the real process medium, at real capacity, under site conditions.
- The equipment runs on the real process medium, feedstock or load.
- Output, capacity, rate or throughput is measured against the contractual figure.
- The run is sustained for the agreed duration, not taken as a spot reading.
- Quality parameters of the output are measured where the contract specifies them.
- Consumption — power, water, air, media — is recorded where it is guaranteed.
- Noise, vibration and temperature are measured in the installed condition where specified.
- Performance is recorded together with the site conditions that were present.
- Ramp-up, turndown and steady-state points are tested where required.
- Data is logged with instrument references so the result is repeatable.
Integration and interfaces
Multi-vendor plants fail at the seams, not inside the machines. The SAT proves the equipment across the boundaries the factory could only simulate.
- Signal exchange with upstream and downstream equipment is proven live.
- Handshakes with the plant control system, SCADA or DCS are verified.
- Cross-vendor safety circuits and shutdown chains are tested end to end.
- Communication protocols and addresses match the interface schedule.
- Data, alarms and statuses appear correctly at the control room.
- Sequencing across equipment boundaries runs without manual intervention.
- Failure and fallback behaviour across interfaces is tested where specified.
- Interface responsibilities are clear where a defect crosses a vendor boundary.
- Any interface finding is logged against the owning scope, not left unassigned.
Handover, training and documentation
Acceptance is not only whether the equipment runs; it is whether the buyer can operate and maintain it. Confirm the handover deliverables before signing.
- Operator and maintenance training is delivered and recorded.
- Operation and maintenance manuals are on site in the agreed language.
- As-built drawings reflect the installed and commissioned configuration.
- Calibration certificates and test records are handed over.
- Commissioning spares and special tools listed in the contract are received.
- The recommended spare-parts list and lead times are provided.
- Software, PLC, HMI and configuration backups are handed over where applicable.
- Warranty terms, start date and claim route are confirmed in writing.
- Outstanding documentation items are listed with an agreed closure date.
Punch list and non-conformity handling
SAT findings should be recorded formally, classified and assigned by root cause. The party that owns the defect is not always the party whose equipment shows it.
- Each finding is described clearly against a specification, drawing or criterion.
- Each is classified by severity: critical, major or minor.
- Root cause is assigned to a scope: supplier, installation, utility or third-party interface.
- Photographs, measured values and records support the finding.
- A corrective-action owner and a target date are agreed.
- Re-test requirements are defined for anything touching performance or safety.
- Cost responsibility follows the contractual root-cause split.
- Open critical and major items are reflected in the acceptance decision.
- Buyer approval is required to close major or critical items.
- The punch list is a single controlled document both sides sign.
Site acceptance decision
The SAT should end with a clear, evidenced decision. Its signature is the heaviest in the delivery chain, so it should not be given against an open critical punch list or under schedule pressure.
- All critical acceptance criteria are met and evidenced.
- The performance run met the contractual figures for the agreed duration.
- All major non-conformities are closed or formally accepted by the buyer.
- Minor open items are listed with owners and dates and accepted by the buyer.
- Integration and safety-circuit tests passed across vendor boundaries.
- Handover deliverables — training, manuals, spares — are received or listed.
- The acceptance decision is recorded: accept, conditionally accept or hold.
- The consequences of signing are understood: final payment, warranty start, transfer of care, custody and control.
Severity classification: SAT findings
Critical
Equipment cannot meet a contractual performance figure, a safety function or a core operating requirement under site conditions.
Hold acceptance.
Major
Equipment operates, but a required performance, integration, document or handover item is missing or failed.
Usually hold until corrected and re-tested.
Minor
Issue does not affect contractual performance, safety or handover, but should be corrected or documented.
May allow conditional acceptance if the buyer accepts.
What buyers should not accept as sufficient SAT evidence
The following may be useful as supporting material, but it should not be accepted as sufficient proof of site acceptance on its own.
A repeat of the FAT run on site power.
Why it is not sufficient · Confirms the equipment survived transport, not that it holds performance on the real process.
A short spot reading of output.
Why it is not sufficient · A performance guarantee is a sustained figure, not a single favourable moment.
A performance run on a substitute medium or reduced load.
Why it is not sufficient · Does not demonstrate the contractual duty under real conditions.
A local function demonstration with interfaces simulated.
Why it is not sufficient · The faults that stop commissioning live at the interfaces, which then go untested.
Results recorded without the site conditions present.
Why it is not sufficient · Performance cannot be judged, or defended, without the voltage, ambient and feed it ran under.
A supplier statement that the system is “commissioned and accepted”.
Why it is not sufficient · Commissioning is the work; acceptance is a witnessed verdict against the protocol.
Verbal closure of punch items on site.
Why it is not sufficient · Nothing prevents the same item reopening after the supplier demobilises.
Handover promised to follow by email.
Why it is not sufficient · Manuals, as-builts and commissioning spares not on site stop the buyer operating the plant.
An acceptance certificate signed against an open critical punch list.
Why it is not sufficient · Turns supplier obligations into buyer negotiations at the moment leverage is lost.
The buyer should require dated, measured, equipment-specific evidence recorded against the SAT protocol and the site conditions that were present on the day.
Common SAT red flags
These red flags are warning signs, not automatic grounds for rejection. Each one should trigger closer control before acceptance is signed.
The supplier pushes to run the SAT before commissioning is finished.
Why it matters · Genuine site defects become open items the buyer chases after sign-off.
The performance run is offered on a substitute medium or reduced load.
Why it matters · The contractual duty is left unproven.
Interfacing vendors are absent on the test day.
Why it matters · Cross-boundary functions and safety chains cannot be proven end to end.
Site utilities are out of specification but the run proceeds unrecorded.
Why it matters · A poor result cannot later be attributed fairly to the equipment or to site.
The supplier argues the FAT signature was final acceptance.
Why it matters · It shifts the site-performance risk onto the buyer.
Punch items are proposed for verbal closure to save a mobilisation.
Why it matters · Open items reopen once the supplier’s team has left.
Acceptance is tied to a payment or schedule deadline rather than the result.
Why it matters · Commercial pressure compromises the acceptance decision.
Handover documents and commissioning spares are “still to come”.
Why it matters · The buyer cannot operate or maintain the plant after demobilisation.
A deemed-acceptance clause treats the equipment as accepted after a fixed number of days.
Why it matters · Acceptance should lapse by performance, not by calendar.
How the SAT completes the FAT: one acceptance chain
A factory acceptance test and a site acceptance test are two ends of the same chain. The FAT verifies build and function at the supplier’s factory, where a punch list still blocks the container and the buyer holds full leverage. The SAT verifies installed performance and integration at site, where the equipment must work under real utilities and alongside other vendors’ equipment. Neither test replaces the other, and the factory-side record is what the site test is measured against, which is why the FAT report should reach site complete.
For a China-sourced order, the strongest control sequence is usually:
- Agree the FAT and SAT protocols before manufacture starts.
- Run the FAT at the factory and close shipment-blocking punch items.
- Run a pre-shipment inspection to verify packing and preservation.
- Deliver, install and commission at site.
- Run the SAT against the FAT record as its baseline.
- Issue final acceptance only when the SAT evidence supports it.
Where an order is placed direct, the acceptance basis has to be set at contract time; how that verification is bought, and why it is cheapest at the moments it feels safest to skip, is the argument of the most expensive moment in an import is the one nobody inspects. For how quality is controlled across the whole China-side order, from qualification to loading, see inspection and quality control in China.
How Sinospect supports the SAT for China-sourced equipment
The SAT itself is run by the buyer’s project team at site. Sinospect’s role is on the China side of the chain, and it is what makes the site test defensible. Before manufacture, Sinospect reviews the FAT and SAT protocols against the technical file so the acceptance criteria exist before there is anything to accept. It witnesses the factory acceptance test in China with the authority the buyer defines, controls the punch list, runs the pre-shipment inspection after punch closure, and assembles the documentation package the site team relies on for commissioning and the SAT. When Sinospect supplies the equipment as principal, this record is its own release gate: the factory is paid only after its QC passes, not before.
If you have a live procurement file, an order placed or an acceptance sequence still under negotiation, submit it for review and Sinospect will set out how the FAT and SAT should split and where the exposure sits.
Related resources and services
Resource · Factory acceptance test checklist
The factory-side complement to this page: the FAT checklist run at the supplier’s factory before shipment. Use it to build the record this SAT is checked against.
OpenResource · Factory acceptance test vs site acceptance test
What each test verifies, what each signature commits the buyer to, and why passing FAT is no guarantee of passing SAT.
OpenResource · Factory acceptance testing guide
Background on FAT scope, the phases of factory inspection, and where acceptance testing fits the project timeline.
OpenResource · Inspection and quality control in China
The control sequence from supplier qualification to loading, and how QC-gated supply differs from third-party inspection.
OpenResource · Pre-shipment inspection checklist
Run between FAT and delivery to verify what actually leaves the factory: packing, marking, quantities and preservation for transport.
OpenResource · The moment nobody inspects
Why acceptance evidence is bought cheapest at the moments it feels safest to skip, from first article to the loading record.
OpenService · Factory acceptance testing in China
Sinospect witnesses the FAT at the Chinese factory and assembles the documentation package the site team relies on for the SAT.
OpenField notes · Selected engagements
Anonymized examples across installation acceptance, post-installation support and corrective action.
OpenFrequently asked questions
What is a site acceptance test (SAT)?
A site acceptance test is a formal, witnessed test of equipment after it has been delivered, installed and commissioned at the buyer’s site. It verifies that the equipment performs to its contractual specification under real utilities, the real process medium and full integration with the surrounding plant. Its signature usually releases final payment, starts the warranty period and transfers care, custody and control to the buyer.
What is the difference between a SAT and a FAT?
A factory acceptance test (FAT) is run at the supplier’s factory before shipment, under factory utilities and simulated conditions; it proves the equipment was built to specification. A site acceptance test (SAT) is run at the buyer’s site after installation and commissioning, under real utilities and full integration; it proves the equipment performs where it has to work. Passing the FAT is no guarantee of passing the SAT.
When is the SAT carried out?
After delivery, installation and commissioning, once the equipment is connected to real utilities and the surrounding plant. It is usually the last witnessed event before final acceptance, and it should not be started while installation or commissioning is still incomplete.
Who runs and witnesses the SAT?
The buyer’s engineering and operations team runs the SAT against the agreed protocol, with the supplier’s commissioning engineer present and other vendors attending where interfaces are tested. For China-sourced equipment, Sinospect’s role is on the factory side: it assembles the FAT record and documentation package the site team uses as the SAT baseline, rather than running the test at the buyer’s site.
What documents are needed for a SAT?
The approved SAT protocol and acceptance criteria, the signed FAT report and closed FAT punch list, as-built drawings, the utility and interface schedule, calibration certificates for site instruments, commissioning records, operation and maintenance manuals, and the acceptance-certificate template. The SAT is checked against these, so they should be on site before the test.
What happens if the equipment fails the SAT?
Each finding is recorded on the punch list, classified by severity and assigned by root cause: supplier scope stays with the supplier, while installation, utility and third-party interface defects sit with whichever party owns that scope. Anything affecting performance or safety is re-tested after corrective action, and critical items normally block acceptance until closed and verified.
Is the SAT the same as commissioning?
No. Commissioning is the work of bringing installed equipment into operation: energising, loop checks, calibration, trial runs. The SAT is the verdict: a witnessed test against the contractual protocol, usually run at the end of commissioning, whose signature carries the commercial consequences.
Should the buyer sign the SAT with open punch items?
Not against open critical items. Every punch item left open at sign-off converts from a supplier obligation into a buyer negotiation, and SAT acceptance typically releases final payment and starts the warranty. Holding a retention against sign-off keeps some leverage once the supplier’s team has demobilised.
How does Sinospect support the SAT for China-sourced equipment?
Sinospect reviews the FAT and SAT protocols against the technical file before manufacture, witnesses the FAT in China, controls the punch list and pre-shipment inspection, and assembles the documentation package the site team relies on for commissioning and the SAT. When Sinospect supplies the equipment as principal, the factory is paid only after its own QC passes, so the record that reaches site is complete.
Setting up the FAT–SAT acceptance sequence for a China order?
Send the equipment scope and where the order stands. Sinospect responds with how the factory and site acceptance tests should be split in the contract, the documents to agree with the supplier, and how factory-side witnessing would build the record the SAT relies on.