Thursday, August 18, 2016

Toaster Testplan

Hi Everyone, 

I am starting a series of posts related to my job search.  In several of my interview I have been given various tasks related to QA work.  The following is the first such request I was given a few years ago.  This sort of request has become the norm in interviews of late.  This is a test plan for a toaster that was requested by a company in the silicon valley.  I will try to find which one but for now here it is.  I hope it can be of some use to you.

Toaster Test plan

Jim Rickel

1.       Introduction:  Through this document I will outline our strategy for testing a standard toaster.  The goal is to list the broad areas of testing here, including general test descriptions.  Further I will be documenting dependencies and resources the test testing team will require for successful validation.
1.1.    In scope items:  We will be doing validation of toaster and any documentation provided for that toaster.  We are making the assumption that this is a standard two slot toaster; with a lowering and rising design.  We are assuming the target market is the US for this product.  Further we assume this to only be available in a single all metal housing, without variation.
1.2.    Out of scope items:  All aspects of the box and packaging are assumed to be out of scope for our validation.   Marketing will be responsible for all advertising including copy proof of their materials.   We are also assuming no responsibility for power outside of the wall socket.
2.       Required Resources:  The following is a list of materials the quality team will require to complete a full pass of the functional test cases.
2.1.    A large cross section of breads, toaster pastries and frozen waffles.  This will assure depth of test coverage.
2.2.    Butter
2.3.    Metal knives
2.4.    Volt meter
2.5.    Standard wall outlet configured to the US 110 voltage.
2.6.    A variety of foreign adapters and a set of matching wall outlet.  See for a list of outlet varieties. 
2.7.    High wattage microwave.
3.       Test Approach:  As this is an electric appliance our goal is to first validate the safety of the toaster though a series of “smoke” validations.  Testing will then move onto a functional verification of the toaster.  We will then benchmark the toaster against others on the market and finally execute a series of destructive tests to assure structural quality.  All testing will assume the removal of packaging stickers prior to execution.
3.1.    Safety and Smoke testing:  This aspect of testing will assure we have created a toaster that is in fact safe to own and operate.  Localization testing with regard to adapters and non US power outlets will also be included in this testing.
3.1.1.  Verify the item can be plugged in safely.  Cord and toaster do not become unsafely hot.
3.1.2.  Verify bread can be toasted safely.  Bread does not ignite; cord and toaster do not become unsafely hot.
3.1.3.  Verify bread can be toasted to maximum darkness.  Bread does not ignite; cord and toaster do not become unsafely hot.
3.1.4. Verify toaster blows fuse when a metal knife is inserted into the operating toaster.  Toaster should become inactive rather than passing current though knife
3.1.5.  Overload the circuit with toaster and high wattage microwave.  Bread does not ignite; cord and toaster do not become unsafely hot. Verify toaster continues to operate safely after circuit is reset.
3.1.6.  Verify operation of toaster with foreign adapters and wall sockets.  The following matrix should be completed.
Pass /Fail
















3.2.    Functional testing:  After we have completed verifying the toaster is safe we will begin functional validation.  Here we are assuming toasting/ warming and clean up to be the primary functionality of the toaster.  We will also include a set of incorrect use test cases in this section.
3.2.1.  Verify toaster evenly toasts a slice of bread from center to crust.
3.2.2.  Verify two slices from a loaf toasted with a similar darkness setting are toasted to the same degree.
3.2.3.  Verify toaster darkness setting.  We will be toasting a sign slice of bread all from a single loaf each with a different darkness setting.  Testing will start with the lightest setting and move the darkness setting one click or millimeter (dependent on the internal potentiometer design) per slice.  The expected outcome would be a gradient change in the darkness each slice is toasted.
3.2.4.  Set toaster darkness to max and begin toasting.  Eject the toast before toasting completion.  Finally start toasting a fresh slice.  Verify the second slice toasts to full darkness.
3.2.5.  Verify the toasting of waffles in the toaster.  Expected outcome should match results returned with bread.
3.2.6.  Verify the toasting of evenly divided bagel halves.  Toaster must accommodate this size of food item.  Expected outcome should match results returned with bread
3.2.7.  Verify the warming of pop tart brand toaster pastries.  Internal jam should become warm and viscous after toasting.  Fire does not occur.
3.2.8.  Verify the warming of breaded fish patty in toaster.  Oil release should not catch fire. 
3.2.9.  Verify you can open the crumb door.  Verify toaster cleans easily and completely.  Poor cleaning could result in bad reviews which will negatively impact sales.
3.2.10.    Verify the toasting of buttered bread does not result in fire.  Verify clean up as well.
3.2.11.    Verify the toasting of Amish friendship bread or other bread containing chocolate does not melt chocolate into internal working of toaster.
3.2.12.    Verify name brand of company is correctly spelled and with correctly logo and font
3.2.13.    Verify model number is correctly marked somewhere on the toaster.
3.3.    Benchmark validation:  In this phase of testing we will be validating our toaster against other toasters currently on the market.  We are going to make the assumption that only our own pervious toaster models will be included for this verification.  For this benchmarking we will want to include competitor’s toasters, our own previous model of toaster and our current model of toaster. This section will not include test cases but rather look for results in the form of a comparison matrix.

Darkness settings
Slot Dimensions
Electrical draw during operation
Electrical draw at rest
Current model

Previous model

Competitor 1

Competitor 2

Competitor 3

3.4.    Destructive Testing:  Our goal with destructive testing is to ensure the product can stand up to some degree of mishandling during its life time. 
3.4.1. Verify the toaster can withstand a fall from a height of three feet and continue operation.
3.4.2. Verify the three feet fall test can be repeated at least five times.
3.4.3. Verify the fall test while the toaster is plugged in.  Plug should not be adversely affected.
3.4.4. Verify the plugged in fall test can be executed at least five times.
3.4.5. Stuff bread slots completely full with bread ramming break down to further fill the slot.  Verify extended toasting does not result in fire.
3.4.6. Verify toaster can remain plugged into the wall socket for a month.  Verify fire does not occur.
3.5.    Documentation Verification:  In this section of validation we will be validating the documentation provided by the tech publications team.  Our goal is not to evaluate the grammar of the text but rather look for factual and formatting errors.
3.5.1. Verify the text of the documentation is free from spelling errors.
3.5.2. Verify the text is correct with regard to the operation of the toaster.
3.5.3. Verify all phone numbers with the documentation by calling each.
3.5.4. Verify online documentation matches printed documentation that is to be included with the toaster.
3.5.5. Verify all photos in the documentation include photos or representations of this current model of toaster.
4.       Entrance criteria:  This will just need to be the toaster with some level of mechanical and electric functionality, it should be able to produce heat from the heating elements and the mechanism to raise and lower should be functional.
5.       Exit criteria:  Safety and functional test cases passed.  Documentation tests should be passed but sign off is fine if product owner wishes.  Benchmarking must be complete.  Destructive testing should be run but is not of a pass / fail nature.
6.       Deliverables: The following items the Quality team recognizes as their responsibility to provide.
·                       Final test plan document
·                       Detailed test cases.
·                       Daily bug triage report  or alternatively this could be represented by Scrum daily burn down report
·                       Final sign off report for functional testing
7.       Risks:  As always the Quality team is a downstream team that does not control when a testable toaster is delivered.  Should engineering or tech publications teams be delayed in delivering to the Quality team then the final testing will be delayed. 
8.       Milestones
·                       Toaster product handed off for testing from engineering
·                       Toaster passes safety verification
·                       Toaster passes functional verification
·                       Toaster destructive tests completed with acceptable results
·                       Toaster benchmarking complete
·                       Documentation handed off for testing
·                       Documentation verification
9.       Schedule: This will be determined by SDLC style, though that said scrum is probably not a wise choice for development of a toaster.   Validation of documentation and toaster product can be performed in parallel depending on resources.   Benchmarking should only need to wait on safety verification of the toaster.

No comments: