Product Qualification Requirements

Technical Questions
#1

Good day experts,
Would like to ask regarding the evidence of product qualification, say we have the HQ and we have other sites located in another country and the material supplied to the other site is supplied by same supplier since the procurement is handled by HQ as well as for the qualification. would the evidence of product qualification can or still applicable to other site considering that the material was qualified based STM esp for environment conditioning (low and moderate)?

please to know your thoughts on this.

thank you in advance

#2

Rosalie,

Yes. If you have qualification data, it doesn’t matter where it was performed as long as the environmental conditions were per the STM. Thanks

1 Like
#3

If the material is qualifed per the standard test method, at the enviromental conditions, then yes a corporate database or QPL can be used across all the sites.

1 Like
#4

thank you John. is this also applicable to Footwear/ Flooring?

#5

thank you Andy for the prompt response

#6

Hello, Greetings of the day from India to all Forum.

Already our Respected ESDA experts have shared their suggestions. But just to join back the platform after a long gap I am just penning down two lines .

Basically PQ tests are stringent tests and the report carries full details to qualify those ESD control items which would be tested at controlled lowest possible Rh% (preferred 9-12%) per both ANSi ESD S 20 20 and IEC61340-5-1 global standards. Now the moderate Rh% clause is being removed in the new test method documents getting revised . Thus, once qualified per the recommended test methods and the specified controlled conditions anywhere , it would perform satisfactorily at any higher Rh% anywhere it is put into use provided it is used properly per the ESD control norms with proper grounding which is the most fundamental requirement for any EPA along with operating Staff’s awareness about ESD Control… and no further PQ tests required wherever the items are used . I am emphasizing on the highlighted portions basically due to my NC observations during most of the CV tests in majority of EPAs at the so called ESD facility certified Units which carry no meaning when the basic things are ignored and only documentation exits.

Thank you all

#7

Hi,

Supplier from China provided the Product Qualification report but not according to ANSI standard. Can this be accepted ?

WhatsApp Image 2025-10-22 at 17.37.36
WhatsApp Image 2025-10-22 at 17.37.36762Ă—1083 161 KB

#8

Ching,

I don’t believe this certificate would meet the requirements product qualification requirements for packaging of ANSI/ESD S20.20 for the following reasons:

  • The test basis/methods used are SJ/T 11277 and 10694 which are Chinese standards. The packaging section of ANSI/ESD S20.20 requires that the resistance measurements meet ANSI/ESD STM11.11, STM 11.12, or STM11.13. Unless the Chinese standards can be proven to be technically equivalent to the ANSI/ESD standards, this would not be acceptable for ANSI/ESD S20.20 certification

  • The ANSI/ESD standards require the test environment to be at 12% +/- 3% RH. These tests were done at 52% RH. Unless your facility can show that its lowest annual RH is higher than 52%, this test report wouldn’t be acceptable.

  • The first two things measured on the list are surface and volume resistivity. Resistivity is usually measured in ohms per square and is 10 times lower than resistance. The results of the report show a resistance measurement. Maybe the English word “resistivity” was translated wrong but this calls into question the test method used

Note: The friction voltage test in this test report may be acceptable for the low charging property from ANSI/ESD S541 as the limits and test method are user defined. So if all you are using this report for is its low charging (friction voltage) part, it may be acceptable