Direct answer: A sample, prototyping, and first-article page cannot stop at "samples available, sample fee negotiable." It should state the technical inputs required, sample fee/freight/refund rules, prototyping lead time and confirmation milestones, how signed and sealed samples are kept, which fields the first-article inspection (FAI) report contains, how mismatches between sample and mass production are handled, and whether a change requires a new sample. Otherwise the customer pays the sample fee, receives a sample with no signed-sample ID, mass production differs in dimension or appearance, and both sides argue from memory.
This guide is for sales, engineering, quality, procurement, production, legal, IT, and website vendors at manufacturers in Changzhou and nearby industrial areas. It explains how to build and accept a website page for samples, prototyping, and first-article approval. Information is current to 2026-10-31. It is a review of public rules, standards, and project practice, not legal, quality-system, or testing advice; specific sample terms, acceptance criteria, sampling plans, and first-article requirements depend on the contract/technical agreement, the company's quality system, and the applicable standards.
A sample is not "send one to look at"; it is a traceable quality baseline. In a sale by sample, the parties should seal the sample, and the goods delivered must match the quality of the sample and its description. Signed-sample IDs, FAI reports, inspection methods, and change/rework rules must be stated on the website, fixed in the contract, and executable on the shop floor.
How does the sample page relate to the OEM/ODM capability page, price page, and warranty page?
The capability page answers "can you make it and within what limits"; the price page answers "how much"; the sample page answers "how to request, what it costs, how long, and how it is approved"; the warranty page answers "what happens if it fails." All four must align: the lead time and fees on the sample page must match the actual prototyping process, quotation, and contract terms.
Sample information at manufacturers usually lives in sales email, technical agreements, sample requests, and shop-floor records, while the website says only "sample processing welcome." What buyers need to confirm is: what drawing/specification to provide, how many pieces, the sample fee, who pays freight, how long, who signs off, what standard mass production is inspected against, and what happens if sample and production differ. A clear page reduces back-and-forth and turns "the sample passed" into a traceable quality baseline.
| Layer | Answers | Governs | Cannot replace |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability page | Process, material, precision, capacity limits | Buyer's capability expectations | Specific sample requirements |
| Price page | Unit price, ranges, tax, MOQ | Price expectations | Sample fee and refund |
| Sample page | Inputs, fees, lead time, sign-off, FAI | Sample process and acceptance baseline | Contract/technical agreement |
| Warranty page | Term, scope, returns, liability | After-sales handling | Sample conformity judgment |
This layered view is editorial; the sealing duty and quality obligation in a sale by sample are in Articles 635 and 636 of the Civil Code.
Which technical inputs should a sample request collect?
At minimum: product name/use, drawing or 3D file with version, material and grade, critical dimensions and tolerances, surface treatment/color, performance or test requirements, sample quantity, delivery address and purpose (trial assembly/test/exhibition/customer approval), expected production volume, and whether a signed sample and FAI report are required.
Most sample disputes are not "we cannot make it" but "you did not say what you wanted." Different versions of the same drawing, material grades written as trade names, color described as "close," critical dimensions without tolerance, and test standards without a version all make the result impossible to judge. The website can provide a structured sample-request checklist so buyers supply this at inquiry; the checklist is not a contract, but it cuts a lot of back-and-forth.
| Input | What to state | Evidence | Common gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Drawing/model | Format, version, revision date, units | PDF/STEP/DWG | Mixed versions |
| Material | Grade, supplier or equivalent, color/texture | Material certificate | Trade name only |
| Critical dimensions | Datums, tolerances, critical vs. non-critical | Dimensioned drawing | No tolerances |
| Surface/appearance | Treatment, color code, gloss, allowed defects | Color chip/limit sample | "Close enough" |
| Performance/test | Test items, standard number and version, limits | Test plan | Standard version unclear |
| Quantity/purpose | Pieces, trial assembly/test/exhibition/approval | Sample request form | "A few" |
| Production forecast | Expected volume, cycle time, packaging | Forecast | Sample process differs |
| Approval method | Signed sample? FAI? Who signs? | Signed-sample form | Verbal approval |
This input list is editorial; specific inputs, tolerances, test standards, and approval methods follow the drawing, technical agreement, and contract.
How should sample fees, freight, and refunds be stated?
State what the sample fee covers (material, labor, programming/tooling amortisation, inspection, packaging), whether tax is included, who pays freight and duties, whether and on what conditions it is refundable (order quantity/amount/time window), whether re-sampling is charged again, and how the sample fee relates to volume pricing. "Sample fee negotiable" leaves the dispute for payment day.
Sample fees are usually cost-plus, not a fraction of the volume unit price. Small lots carry high material waste, changeover/programming, inspection, and courier costs, so charging the volume unit price loses money; conversely, using a high sample fee to screen buyers requires clear refund terms, or the buyer feels charged twice. The website gives the formula and rules, the quotation gives the amount, and the contract gives the final obligation.
| Item | What to state | Who bears it | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fee components | Material, labor, programming/tooling, inspection, packaging | Buyer prepays | Quotation breakdown |
| Tax | Inclusive/exclusive, invoice type | Per quotation basis | Invoice |
| Freight/duties | Prepaid/collect, international duties and clearance | Per trade term | Courier/customs documents |
| Refund | Order quantity/amount/time window | Refund when met | Order/refund record |
| Re-sampling | Design change/customer cause charged or not | Per responsibility | Change order |
| Sample ownership | Returned, retained, or may be disassembled | Per agreement | Sample form |
Fee and refund rules are editorial; specific amounts, tax, freight, duties, and refund conditions follow the quotation, contract, and Incoterms.
The cost can be explained as sample cost ≈ material + labor hours × rate + programming/tooling amortisation + inspection + packaging + freight. For example, material RMB 800, 12 labor hours at RMB 80, inspection RMB 600, packaging and freight RMB 240, totals about RMB 2,600. These are illustrative assumptions to explain the basis, not a quotation for any product, process, or customer; actual amounts follow the quotation.
How should prototyping lead time and confirmation milestones be laid out?
Split the time into technical confirmation, scheduling, machining, inspection, dispatch, customer approval, and signed/sealed sample. State working days and dependencies (frozen drawing, material arrival, customer confirmation) for each. The clock starts after the drawing and sample fee are confirmed, not from an unread email; expediting needs separate cost and feasibility.
"Sample in seven days" without a start point and dependencies almost guarantees a dispute: drawings change, material arrives late, customer approval is slow. The website can give typical ranges (for example, simple parts in 5–10 working days, longer for tooling or special processes), but must label them as examples subject to review, and state the customer-side confirmation deadline.
| Milestone | Output | Who confirms | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Technical confirmation | Drawing/material/standard/quantity frozen | Engineering + buyer | Review record |
| Fee confirmation | Sample fee, freight, refund rules | Sales + buyer | Quotation/payment |
| Scheduling/machining | Sample work order, material issue | Production | Work order/issue slip |
| Inspection | Dimension/appearance/performance records | Quality | Inspection record |
| Dispatch | Tracking number, packing list | Sales/warehouse | Courier slip/photos |
| Customer approval | Receipt, trial, written feedback | Buyer | Email/signed form |
| Signed/sealed sample | Sample ID, retained pieces | Both parties | Signed-sample record |
These milestones and times are editorial; specific working days, expediting conditions, and approval deadlines follow project review, capacity, and the contract.
How should a signed and sealed sample be handled?
A signed sample must be uniquely identifiable: sample ID, drawing/version, material batch, color/texture, measured critical dimensions, inspection method, signer/date, quantity retained by each party, and retention period. In a sale by sample, the parties should seal the sample; the goods delivered must match the quality of the sample and its description.
Article 635 of the Civil Code provides that in a sale by sample, the parties shall seal the sample and may describe its quality; the seller must deliver goods matching the quality of the sample and its description. Article 636 adds that where the buyer does not know of a hidden defect in the sample, the seller's goods must still meet the usual quality standard for goods of that kind, even if they match the sample. In other words, signing a sample is not a phone photo; it is a combination of physical samples and records retained by both sides that can answer "this is not the piece we approved."
| Element | Requirement | Evidence | Risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sample ID | Unique ID linked to order/drawing version | Signed-sample form | Mixed versions |
| Physical retention | At least one piece per party, sealed and labelled | Sealed bag/photos | One-sided retention |
| Quality description | Critical dimensions, appearance, function, allowed deviation | Inspection record | Only "qualified" |
| Material/batch | Grade, supplier, traceable batch | Material certificate | Material change unnotified |
| Signer/date | Authorised signatures from both parties | Signature page | Verbal approval |
| Retention period | Covers mass production and warranty | Retention log | Sample lost |
These elements are editorial; sealing and quality obligations are in Articles 635 and 636 of the Civil Code; specific judgments follow the contract, technical agreement, and inspection standard.
What should a first-article inspection (FAI) report contain?
At minimum: part number/drawing and version, batch/date, material certificate, measured critical dimensions against tolerances, appearance judgment, functional/performance tests, gauge/equipment and calibration status, conclusion, deviation and concession records, signed-sample ID, photos, and inspector/reviewer signatures.
FAI is the gate that turns "the sample passed" into "mass production is repeatable." Without it, when the first production batch fails, there is no way to tell whether the process drifted, the tool wore, or incoming material changed. FAI need not be heavy, but it must answer three questions: does this batch use the approved drawing/material/process? What are the measured values of critical characteristics? Who judged it acceptable, and on what basis?
| Field | Content | Evidence | Common gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Identification | Part number, drawing/version, batch, date | FAI cover | Version missing |
| Material | Grade, batch, certificate | Material certificate | Certificate missing |
| Dimensions | Measured critical dimensions, tolerance, judgment | Measurement record | Only "OK" |
| Appearance | Color, texture, allowed defects, limit sample | Photos/limit sample | Subjective |
| Function/performance | Test items, standard, results | Test report | Standard version unclear |
| Equipment/gauges | ID, calibration validity | Calibration certificate | Expired unnoticed |
| Judgment/deviation | Accept/concession/rework, approval | Approval record | Verbal concession |
| Sample link | Signed-sample ID, storage location | Signed-sample record | Cannot match |
These FAI fields are editorial; specific first-article, sampling, and acceptance requirements follow the quality system, customer requirements, and applicable standards.
How should sample-to-production mismatches and sampling be handled?
First classify the difference (dimension/appearance/material/function) and its impact, then decide rework, concession, re-make, or return; keep the signed sample, FAI, inspection records, and photos. Sampling may follow the AQL schemes in GB/T 2828.1 or a customer-specified standard, but the contract/technical agreement must state the standard number, version, inspection level, and AQL value.
GB/T 2828.1-2012, Sampling procedures for inspection by attributes — Part 1: Sampling schemes indexed by acceptance quality limit (AQL) for lot-by-lot inspection, is a current recommended national standard (effective 2013-02-15, identical to ISO 2859-1:1999) for lot-by-lot inspection. It provides a sampling system, not "which AQL a given product should use"—that depends on product characteristics, customer requirements, and risk. The Standardization Law also provides that mandatory standards must be implemented, recommended standards are voluntary, enterprises must disclose the number and name of the standards they implement, and technical requirements for export products follow the contract. So "inspected to the national standard" is not enough; state the standard number, version, and acceptance value.
| Check | Method | Frequency | Evidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Critical dimensions | 100% or AQL sampling, calibrated gauges | Per lot/first article | Measurement record |
| Appearance | Limit sample/color chip, fixed lighting | Per lot | Photos/limit sample |
| Material | Certificate, sampling/spectrometry | Per incoming lot | Material certificate |
| Function/performance | Per test standard, record equipment and parameters | First article/periodic | Test report |
| Packaging/labels | Label, quantity, protection | Per lot | Shipping photos |
| Deviation handling | Concession/rework/re-make approval | When occurring | Approval record |
These methods are editorial; the sampling standard is in the GB/T 2828.1-2012 standard information page (full text is not provided there for copyright reasons); applicability and acceptance values follow the contract/technical agreement.
Does a design or process change require a new sample?
Check whether the change affects critical characteristics, material, tooling/fixtures, process parameters, or suppliers. If it affects critical characteristics or customer assembly, re-sample and re-sign/re-FAI; packaging or non-critical marking changes may be confirmed in writing. Notify the customer and keep version records.
"The sample passed" applies only to that drawing, material, and process. Changing a material supplier, modifying a tool, adjusting process parameters, or switching a surface-treatment vendor can move production away from the signed sample. The website can state change grading and re-sampling rules so buyers know which changes trigger a new sample and which need only written confirmation; this also links the PCN/change-notification process to the sample page.
| Change type | New sample? | Re-FAI? | Notification |
|---|---|---|---|
| Critical dimension/tolerance | Yes | Yes | Change order + sign-off |
| Material/supplier | Usually | Yes | Change order + certificate |
| Tool/fixture/program | Yes | Yes | Change order + first article |
| Surface/color | Yes (limit sample) | Yes | Color chip/limit sample |
| Packaging/label | No | As needed | Written confirmation |
| Non-critical parameters | Per impact assessment | As needed | Change record |
This grading is editorial; specific re-sampling, validation, and notification requirements follow the change-control procedure, customer requirements, and contract.
What should the page say, and how should it link?
Include the sample-request inputs, fees and refunds, lead time and milestones, signed/sealed sample rules, FAI fields, sampling and consistency, change/re-sample rules, FAQs, and one clear contact route; link to the OEM/ODM capability page, price page, warranty/returns page, COA/batch traceability page, and contact page. Do not publish customer drawings, customer names, or unauthorised product photos.
Make "samples and first article" a page that answers the question on its own, not one line in the capability page. A workable structure: the request checklist, then fees and lead time, then signed sample, FAI, sampling, and changes, and finally an eight-item pre-shipment checklist. For overseas buyers, add trade terms, freight/duties, and test-standard versions, and link to the export-documents page.
| Page module | What to write | Evidence/asset | Common gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Request checklist | Drawing version, material, tolerance, tests, quantity, purpose | Sample request form | Only "contact us" |
| Fees/refund | Components, tax, freight, refund conditions | Quotation | "Fee negotiable" |
| Lead time | Working days, start point, dependencies, expediting | Process records | No start point |
| Signed sample | ID, retention, quality description, retention period | Signed-sample form | Verbal approval |
| FAI | Fields, judgment, deviation approval | FAI template | Only "100% inspected" |
| Sampling/consistency | Standard number/version, level, AQL | Inspection spec | "Per national standard" |
| Change/re-sample | Grading, notification, re-sample/re-FAI | Change procedure | Material change unnotified |
| Contact | Submit a sample request/book a review | Form/contact page | No next step |
These modules are editorial; specific inputs, fees, lead times, sign-off, FAI, and change rules follow the contract, technical agreement, and quality system.
Go-live acceptance checklist
Ten checks: request inputs, fees and refunds, lead time and start point, signed/sealed sample, FAI fields, sampling and acceptance, change/re-sample, privacy and customer data, links and contact, and version/update date. Each needs an owner, evidence, and review date.
Sales, engineering, quality, production, legal, IT, and the website vendor can share this list. The pass condition is not "the page says samples are available"; it is that the buyer knows what to provide, what it costs, how long, how it is approved, what production is inspected against, and what happens after a change—and that these statements match the actual process and contract template.
| Check | Pass condition | Evidence | If it fails |
|---|---|---|---|
| Request inputs | Drawing version/material/tolerance/tests/quantity/purpose | Request form | Add fields |
| Fees/refund | Components, tax, freight, refund conditions | Quotation | Add rules |
| Lead time | Working days, start point, dependencies, expediting | Process records | Add explanation |
| Signed sample | ID, retention, quality description, period | Signed-sample form | Add process |
| FAI | ID/material/dimensions/appearance/function/judgment | FAI template | Add template |
| Sampling | Standard number + version + level + AQL | Inspection spec | Add standard |
| Changes | Grading, notification, re-sample/re-FAI | Change procedure | Add procedure |
| Privacy | No customer drawings, names, unauthorised photos | Authorisation/redaction | Remove/redact |
| Links/contact | Capability, price, warranty, COA pages reachable | Page test | Fix links |
| Version | Update date, change log, effective method | Version record | Add record |
This checklist is editorial; specific sample, sign-off, FAI, sampling, and change requirements follow the law, contract/technical agreement, quality system, and applicable standards.
Who should read this, who should not, and what decisions does it support?
It suits manufacturers in Changzhou and nearby areas with custom parts, non-standard parts, molds, injection/machining/sheet-metal work, or OEM/ODM business that need to explain prototyping clearly. It does not suit teams that want "free samples" to attract every buyer, or that treat a website statement as a quality agreement.
Read it if you are in sales, engineering, quality, production, procurement, legal, IT, or a website vendor; you are building a sample page, prototyping process, sign-off system, FAI template, sampling plan, or change control; or you need to decide the sample fee, lead time, who signs, what production is inspected against, and whether a change needs a new sample. Skip it if you have no prototyping or inspection capability but promise "any material, any precision"; your website, quotation, and technical agreement each say something different; or you want one page to replace the quality system, test reports, or counsel. It supports self-review of sample inputs, fees and refunds, milestones, signed samples, FAI, sampling, and change/re-sample rules.
Lingyi Information is a website development and enterprise AI project provider, not a testing body, certification body, law firm, or quality-system auditor. This article is not a substitute for legal, quality-system, testing, certification, or contract advice. Changzhou projects are delivered remotely or on site as confirmed per project; Lingyi is one candidate, does not claim a local office or team, and does not promise lead times, yields, test results, or inquiries.
FAQ
Should the sample page state specific prices?
State the cost components, tax basis, freight allocation, and refund conditions, and leave the amount to the quotation. Sample fees vary widely with material, labor, programming/tooling, and inspection; a hard-coded number reads as a quote for every product, while saying nothing leaves buyers unable to budget.
What is the risk of "free samples"?
Without screening conditions and written approval, free samples attract low-intent inquiries and can end after the sample is taken. You can offer "free samples where eligible / sample fee refunded on order," with conditions (complete drawings, volume expectation, refund threshold), but do not make free the default.
Is the customer saying "okay" enough to sign off a sample?
No. In a sale by sample, the parties should seal the sample, and the goods delivered must match the quality of the sample and its description. Fix that "okay" with a sample ID, retained pieces on both sides, measured critical dimensions, appearance limit samples, and signer/date; chat records alone are weak evidence in a production dispute.
Must the first-article report be full-dimension?
It depends on the product and customer. Full-dimension suits new tools, new processes, and critical assemblies; non-critical parts may measure only critical characteristics and customer-specified dimensions. But the report must state what was measured, with which equipment, against which limits, and who reviewed it—not just "100% inspected and qualified."
Is "per the national standard" enough for sampling?
No. State the standard number, version, inspection level, and AQL value, for example "GB/T 2828.1-2012, general inspection level II, AQL 1.0," and say whether critical characteristics are tightened or 100% inspected. Recommended standards are voluntary and bind only when written into the contract/technical agreement; export product requirements follow the contract.
Does changing a material supplier require a new signed sample?
If the grade, performance, or appearance may change, usually yes—re-sample and re-sign/re-FAI, or at least validate the material and confirm an appearance limit sample. Notify the customer and keep records; packaging or non-critical marking changes may be confirmed in writing without re-sampling.
One-sentence takeaway
A Changzhou manufacturer's sample, prototyping, and first-article page should not stop at "samples available, fee negotiable." It should state request inputs, fees and refunds, lead-time start, signed/sealed samples, FAI fields, sampling and acceptance, and change/re-sample rules—because a sample is a traceable quality baseline, and the website, quotation, technical agreement, and shop-floor records must tell the same story.
Method and limitations
This is a review of public rules, standards, and project practice, not a compliance certification or legal opinion on any company, product, process, sample, or test. No undisclosed customer drawings, customer names, prices, or test data were used. The sample-cost example (material RMB 800, 12 hours at RMB 80, inspection RMB 600, packaging and freight RMB 240, about RMB 2,600) and lead-time ranges are editorial assumptions, used only to explain the basis; they are not quotations or delivery commitments. Actual sample terms, sign-off, FAI, sampling, change, and testing requirements depend on the law, contract/technical agreement, quality system, and applicable standards.
Sources and scope
Information is current to 2026-10-31. The following are public official/primary pages; their scope, version, and wording control.
- Civil Code of the PRC, contract book: Supreme People's Court. Articles 509, 577, 584, 635, and 636 (sealing and quality obligation in a sale by sample).
- Product Quality Law of the PRC (2018 amendment): State Administration for Market Regulation. Article 26 (quality consistent with a physical sample), Article 40 (repair, replacement, return, compensation).
- Standardization Law of the PRC (2017 revision, effective 2018-01-01): Standardization Administration of China. Mandatory standards must be implemented, recommended standards are voluntary, enterprises disclose the number and name of implemented standards, and export product requirements follow the contract.
- GB/T 2828.1-2012, Sampling procedures for inspection by attributes — Part 1: Sampling schemes indexed by acceptance quality limit (AQL) for lot-by-lot inspection: National Standards Full-Text Public System. Current recommended national standard, effective 2013-02-15, identical to ISO 2859-1:1999; full text is not provided there for copyright reasons.
Samples and first article are part of onboarding validation; see the supplier onboarding and AVL page acceptance checklist.