Field Documentation and Reporting
Core concepts
Documentation must be accurate, contemporaneous, and reproducible. Record what was measured, how, with what instrument, under what conditions, and by whom. Use standardized units and reference conditions. Photograph anomalies with scale and context. Distinguish observation (what you saw) from interpretation (what you think it means) from recommendation (what to do). Understand chain of custody and data integrity. Reports should state scope, methods, limitations, findings, and recommendations clearly. Know how to communicate uncertainty honestly.
Traps
Questions test the observation vs. interpretation boundary - mixing them undermines credibility. Another trap: omitting limitations or conditions of the assessment. Reporting a single number without units or reference is a classic error. Also watch overclaiming: a screening result presented as a definitive diagnosis. Incomplete photo context (no scale, no location) is a frequent documentation failure.
Worked example / rule of thumb
A finding entry: Observation - "Blower door: 3,200 CFM50 at 50 Pa, wind 5 mph, indoor 68°F, outdoor 40°F." Interpretation - "ACH50 = 12, above typical tightness target." Recommendation - "Target air sealing at rim joist and attic hatch." Rule of thumb: if a reviewer can't reproduce your result from the report, it's incomplete.
Study approach
Draft reports using the observation–interpretation–recommendation structure. Always include conditions, units, and limitations.