Certificates, inspection and what each document actually covers
Two certificates exist today and they cover different things. Stating the scope precisely is more useful than claiming more — an over-claimed certificate fails audit.
Two certificates exist today and they cover different things. Stating the scope precisely is more useful than claiming more — an over-claimed certificate fails audit.
Certificate CN24-33502A, issued by AXE REGISTER Ltd, valid from 3 January 2025 to 2 January 2028. The scope on the certificate is "manufacture and sale of acrylic (organic glass) products".
What this means: our quality management system — how we control drawings, inspection, non-conforming parts, calibration and corrective action — has been audited against GB/T 19001-2016 / ISO 9001:2015 and found compliant.
What it does not mean: ISO 9001 is a management system standard, not a product certification. It does not certify that a particular part meets a particular specification. That is what the inspection sheet is for.
| Certificate number | CN24-33502A |
| Standard | GB/T 19001-2016 / ISO 9001:2015 |
| Scope | Manufacture and sale of acrylic (organic glass) products |
| Issuing body | AXE REGISTER Ltd |
| Initial registration | 3 January 2025 |
| Valid until | 2 January 2028 |
| Markings | IAF, EA/MLA, CNAS traceable |
Report CANEC26018787801, tested to EU RoHS Directive (EU) 2015/863. All ten restricted substances were not detected in the sample tested.
The scope needs stating carefully. The sample submitted was cast acrylic sheet from our sheet supplier. So the report demonstrates that the raw material complies with RoHS. It does not certify that every finished part we make is RoHS certified — a finished part could in principle include other materials, coatings or print inks that were not part of that sample.
We say this because buyers' compliance teams need to know what is in their file. If your file requires a finished-part report, that is a separate test, which we can arrange and quote as a separate line.
| Report number | CANEC26018787801 |
| SGS job number | DGP26-005493 |
| Laboratory | SGS-CSTC, Guangzhou, CNAS L0167 |
| Sample submitted by | The sheet supplier (Shenzhen Xintao New Materials) |
| Sample | Cast acrylic sheet |
| Standard | EU RoHS Directive (EU) 2015/863 |
| Substances tested | Pb, Hg, Cd, Cr(VI), PBB, PBDE, DEHP, BBP, DBP, DIBP |
| Result | All ten not detected (ND) |
| Scope | Raw material only |
Four checkpoints, each with a different purpose:
SGS, Bureau Veritas, Intertek and TÜV are all welcome. Tell us the standard and give a few days' notice so parts are staged and paperwork is ready. We do not charge for the visit; the inspection company bills you directly.
Where a customer wants a pre-shipment inspection, we prefer to be told at order stage rather than at the end, because a pre-shipment inspection is only useful if the parts can still be reworked. Once they are packed and the container is booked, an inspection can only accept or reject.
Listed explicitly, so nobody has to ask:
Any supplier claiming all of these for acrylic sheet work is either misunderstanding what the certificates are or overstating them.
Quality pages usually list certificates. Certificates say a system exists; they do not say what goes wrong. This is what goes wrong, in the order we see it.
First, appearance: a scratch, a polishing mark, a smear of compound. It is the most common complaint and the least structural, and it is almost always introduced in packing or in handling rather than in machining. Second, fit: a part that does not seat because one dimension drifted, which traces back to annealing or to a datum taken from the wrong face. Third, colour: a batch that reads warmer than the approved swatch. Fourth, cracking in service, which is nearly always crazing from a cleaning agent or a stress crack from an over-constrained fixing.
| Complaint | Typical cause | How it is closed |
|---|---|---|
| Scratch or polish mark | Handling or packing | Film until install, individual wrap, foam corners; replaced without argument |
| Part does not seat | Datum from the wrong face, or no anneal before final cut | Single-datum drawing, anneal before finish machining, first article measured on the datum |
| Colour reads warm | Sheet batch difference | Master swatch kept at the plant, D65 measurement, sheet bought for the whole run |
| Crack in service | Cleaning agent, or a rigid four-side fixing | Grade checked against the wipe protocol; slotted holes and a compressible washer specified |
A complaint is closed when the cause is identified, not when the replacement ships. The replacement is the apology; the cause is the fix. On the four categories above, three of them are prevented by something on the drawing or in the packing spec rather than by inspection — which is why we would rather argue about a drawing at quote stage than about a defect after delivery.
What we do not have: an ISO 9001 certificate that covers design, because we do not design. We fabricate to a drawing. That distinction matters to an auditor, and it is stated plainly on the certificate scope rather than implied away.
Tell us which standard your file requires. If we hold it, you will have it the same day. If we do not, we will say so and quote the testing rather than imply a certificate we have not earned.