结论：送检前花半天自查，能省下几周的往返
轮椅送检后出现的问题，相当一部分不是产品本身的性能问题，而是准备不足造成的：样品配置不对、附件没送、资料不全、参数说明不清、型号标识不符。
这些问题导致的后果是：测试中断等待补充、返工重测、或者报告出来后发现覆盖不全。
而它们在送检前用一份清单过一遍，大部分能被发现。 这一遍自查花的时间不多，但能避免后面的往返。
样品方面的自查
样品状态。 是不是量产状态？工艺、材料、供应商与量产一致吗？
样品数量。 够不够？考虑到破坏性试验的消耗了吗？
型号与规格。 送的型号与要申报的型号一致吗？规格（座宽、轮径）是要测的那个吗？
配置。 基础配置还是含选装件？与要覆盖的配置一致吗？
标识。 铭牌信息完整吗？与资料一致吗？
批号与日期。 记录了吗？
外观。 有无运输损伤？
功能。 送检前确认各功能正常吗？
「送检前确认功能正常」这一步常被省略，结果样品到了实验室发现某个功能不工作，测试只能中断。
附件与配套件
坐垫与靠背。 声称配套的都送了吗？
脚踏与扶手。 可拆卸的部件都齐吗？
电池与充电器（电动）。 送了吗？充满电了吗？
工具。 调节和拆装需要的工具。
选装件。 要覆盖的选装件送了吗？
备品。 易损件的备件，比如脚垫。
包装。 如果要做运输验证，包装要一并送。
「电池充电状态」影响测试安排。 续航测试需要满电，电池没充电测试就要等待。
资料方面的自查
产品说明书。 最新版本吗？
技术参数表。 各项参数齐全吗？
图纸或结构说明。 便于确定测试点。
材料清单。 特别是面料、坐垫材料（阻燃和生物相容性需要）。
电气资料（电动）。 电路图、元件清单、电池规格。
软件信息（含软件的）。 版本号。
已有报告。 其他市场的报告，可能减少重复测试。
目标市场清单。 影响标准的选择。
「目标市场清单」是最有价值的信息之一。 知道产品要去哪些市场，测试可以一次按较严的口径做，避免后续补测。
参数一致性的自查
这是最值得花时间的一项：
说明书中的每个技术参数，能在哪里找到依据？
标识上的参数与说明书一致吗？
宣传材料上的参数与说明书一致吗？
参数的测试条件说明清楚了吗？
各型号的参数分别列清楚了吗？
参数不一致是审查中最常被指出的问题之一，而它在送检前完全可以避免。
常被遗漏的项目
阻燃。 面料与坐垫材料的燃烧性能，经常被漏。
生物相容性。 与皮肤接触部件的评价。
电池文件。 含电池产品的安全与运输文件。
选装件的数据。 只测基础配置。
说明书的技术审核。 参数与实际不符。
标识的完整性。 必载信息缺失。
这六项在轮椅送检中被遗漏的频率较高，建议作为重点检查。
测试要求的确认
测试项目。 需要测哪些项目？依据什么标准？
标准版本。 用哪个版本？目标市场采纳的是哪个版本？
测试条件。 有特殊的条件要求吗（比如按招标要求的条件）？
报告语言。 需要英文吗？现在说比事后补便宜。
报告内容。 需要实测数据还是结论就够？
时间要求。 什么时候要报告？
「报告语言」建议在委托时就确定。 事后要英文版等同于重新出具报告，而委托时提出几乎不增加成本。
特殊要求的沟通
需要覆盖的型号范围。 如果是系列产品，覆盖论证的思路。
需要加做的项目。 比如低温、湿热、耐久后复测。
样品的处置。 测试后样品怎么处理、要不要退回。
过程的沟通。 出现问题时怎么联系。
保密要求。 如果有。
自查的组织
做成固定清单。 每次送检按清单过一遍。
分工明确。 谁负责样品、谁负责资料。
留出时间。 自查发现问题需要时间补救。
记录。 自查的结果记录下来。
持续完善。 每次遇到新问题就补充进清单。
「做成固定清单」的价值在于一致性 ——不依赖个人记忆，换个人也不会漏。
自查清单的一个模板
| 类别 | 检查项 |
|---|---|
| 样品 | 状态、数量、型号、配置、标识、功能 |
| 附件 | 坐垫、脚踏、扶手、电池、工具、选装件 |
| 资料 | 说明书、参数表、图纸、材料清单、电气资料 |
| 一致性 | 说明书与标识、宣传材料、已有报告 |
| 要求 | 测试项目、标准版本、报告语言、时间 |
| 特殊 | 覆盖范围、加做项目、样品处置 |
这份模板可以作为起点，按企业的实际情况调整和补充。
与实验室的前期沟通
送检前与实验室沟通能解决很多问题：确认测试项目和标准；确认样品和附件的需求；确认资料清单；估计周期；以及说明特殊要求。
「估计周期」对项目安排很重要，特别是耐久这类周期长的项目，早知道才能早安排。
自查发现问题后的处理
样品问题。 重新准备符合要求的样品。
资料缺失。 补齐后再送。
参数不一致。 先内部澄清，确定以哪个为准。
要求不明确。 与实验室沟通确认。
时间不够。 调整计划或分批送检。
「参数不一致要先内部澄清」很重要。 带着不一致的资料送检，实验室也无法判断以哪个为准，最终还是要回来澄清。
分批送检的考虑
如果时间紧或样品不足，可以考虑分批：先做周期长的项目（耐久、环境）；再做其余项目；以及先做关键项目确认没有大问题。
分批的前提是各批之间的样品一致，否则数据的可比性会受影响。
我们的做法
我们在接收样品时会做基本的核对——型号、数量、外观、附件、资料。发现问题会及时告知，但补充仍然需要时间，所以委托方在送检前自查能明显缩短整体周期。
对于委托方提供了完整资料和明确要求的委托，测试的推进会顺畅得多——我们不必反复询问，委托方也不必反复补充。
如果你准备送检，想确认要准备什么，可以把产品和目标市场发过来，我们给出具体的样品和资料清单，或者直接联系：132 4819 8029。检测能力见服务介绍，产品分类见手动轮椅检测与电动轮椅检测，案例见案例。
English version
Conclusion. A substantial share of the problems arising after wheelchairs are submitted for testing are not product performance problems but consequences of inadequate preparation: the wrong sample configuration, missing accessories, incomplete documentation, unclear parameter descriptions and model markings that do not match. The results are testing interrupted while material is supplied, work repeated, or a report issued that turns out not to cover everything. Working through a checklist before submission catches most of them. The exercise takes little time and saves the exchanges that follow.
Checking samples. Sample condition: is it production condition, with process, materials and suppliers matching production? Sample quantity: is it sufficient, allowing for destructive testing? Model and specification: does the submitted model match what will be registered, and is the specification, in seat width and wheel size, the one to be tested? Configuration: base or with options, and does it match what is to be covered? Marking: is the nameplate information complete and consistent with the documentation? Batch number and date: recorded? Appearance: any transit damage? And function: has each function been confirmed working before submission? Confirming function beforehand is commonly skipped, and the result is a sample arriving at the laboratory with a function that does not work and testing halted.
Accessories and matching components. Cushions and backrests: has everything claimed as matching been sent? Footplates and armrests: are all removable parts present? Batteries and chargers for powered chairs: sent, and charged? Tools: those needed for adjustment and removal. Options: have those to be covered been sent? Spares: for wear parts such as ferrules. And packaging: needed if transport validation is required. Battery charge state affects scheduling: range testing needs a full charge, and an uncharged battery makes testing wait.
Checking documentation. Instructions for use: the current version? Technical parameter list: complete? Drawings or construction descriptions: to establish test points. Material list: upholstery and cushion materials especially, needed for flammability and biocompatibility. Electrical documentation for powered chairs: circuit diagrams, component lists and battery specifications. Software information where software is present: version numbers. Existing reports: from other markets, which may reduce duplicated testing. And the target market list: which drives standard selection. The target market list is among the most valuable pieces of information: knowing where the product is going allows testing once to the stricter specification and avoids supplementary testing later.
Checking parameter consistency. This deserves the most time. For each technical parameter in the instructions, where is its supporting evidence? Do the parameters on the marking match the instructions? Do those in marketing material match the instructions? Are the test conditions for each parameter stated? And are parameters listed separately for each model? Parameter inconsistency is among the findings most often raised during review, and it is entirely avoidable before submission.
Commonly omitted items. Flammability of upholstery and cushion materials, frequently missed. Biocompatibility of skin-contacting components. Battery documentation covering safety and transport. Data for options, where only the base configuration was tested. Technical review of the instructions, where parameters do not match reality. And completeness of marking, where required information is missing. These six are omitted comparatively often in wheelchair submissions and deserve particular attention.
Confirming test requirements. Test items: which items, to which standards? Standard versions: which edition, and which has the target market adopted? Test conditions: any special requirements, such as tender-specified conditions? Report language: English needed, since saying so now costs less than adding it later? Report content: measured data needed, or conclusions sufficient? And timing: when is the report needed? Settle report language when commissioning: adding an English version afterwards amounts to reissuing the report, while requesting it at the outset costs almost nothing.
Communicating special requirements. The range of models to be covered, and the coverage argument for a family. Additional items to be included, such as low temperature, damp heat or post-durability re-measurement. Disposal of samples after testing, including whether they are to be returned. Communication during the process, covering how to make contact when problems arise. And confidentiality requirements where they exist.
Organising the self-check. Make it a standing checklist, worked through before every submission. Assign responsibility clearly between samples and documentation. Allow time, since problems found need time to remedy. Record the results. And improve it continuously, adding each new problem encountered. A standing checklist provides consistency: it does not depend on individual memory and nothing is missed when someone different does it.
How we handle it. We perform a basic check on receipt covering model, quantity, appearance, accessories and documentation, and raise problems promptly, though supplying what is missing still takes time, so a client's self-check before submission shortens the overall schedule noticeably. Where a client supplies complete documentation and clear requirements, testing proceeds far more smoothly: we need not keep asking and the client need not keep supplying.
Send us the product and target markets and we will give you a specific sample and documentation list. Phone or WeChat: +86 132 4819 8029.