Liquid Product Sample Data Sheet for Filling Machine RFQs

A liquid name such as oil, sauce, detergent or serum is not enough to select a filling machine. Two products sold under the same category can behave differently when temperature, aeration, particles, chemistry or storage changes. This data sheet helps a buyer describe the representative product and the test conditions before a pump, piston, weighing or other dosing principle is proposed. It does not claim that one filling method is universally suitable.

1. Identify the exact product and decision stage

Record the product name or internal code, formulation or grade, batch or lot, manufacturing date and storage condition. State whether the sample represents the launch formula, a development sample or a substitute. If the formula may change, list the properties that are still open. A successful trial with a substitute should be reported as screening evidence, not final compatibility evidence.

Define what the review must decide: preliminary filler selection, nozzle screening, cleaning review, quotation configuration or acceptance of an ordered machine. Name the target container, nominal fill, permitted tolerance and required quality checks. Regulatory or internal release criteria should come from the buyer’s qualified reviewer.

2. Record viscosity with temperature and method

A single viscosity number is incomplete without the measurement temperature, instrument, spindle or geometry, speed and sample conditioning. If the product changes with shear or settling, provide a range or a small curve rather than one isolated value. Record the actual expected filling temperature and the permitted change from start-up to the end of a run.

Also describe practical behavior: does the liquid string, drip, cling to surfaces, trap air or change after repeated circulation? If the product is heated, state how temperature is maintained before and during filling and which party supplies that equipment. Do not infer pump compatibility from viscosity alone.

3. Describe foam, gas and headspace behavior

Note whether the product foams when poured, pumped or returned to a tank. Record any deaeration, resting time or bottom-up filling requirement used in the current process. Provide the container opening and target headspace because nozzle position and filling profile can affect foam and splash.

If the product contains dissolved gas or is sensitive to oxygen, light or agitation, identify the relevant handling boundary and reviewer. A standard open filling trial cannot prove suitability for a controlled-atmosphere or pressure-sensitive process unless that condition is included in the test scope.

4. Define particles, fibers and suspended solids

Record the maximum particle dimension, typical distribution, hardness, shape and whether solids settle, float or bridge. State the concentration by an agreed method and explain whether gentle agitation is permitted. Send a representative sample that includes normal solids rather than only the liquid phase.

Particles can affect valves, tubing, pump clearances, nozzles and fill consistency. The review should identify the narrowest product path and the intended anti-settling method. A machine that moves one sample without blockage does not prove long-run performance with every production batch.

5. Provide chemistry, compatibility and hazard inputs

List pH, solvents, oils, salts, fragrances or other constituents relevant to wetted materials, seals, tubing and cleaning chemicals. Attach a current safety data sheet where applicable and state any temperature, ventilation or hazardous-area requirement. The equipment supplier can propose contact materials only after receiving the relevant chemistry; the buyer must confirm destination and site requirements.

Record whether product discoloration, absorption, swelling, extractables or cross-contamination are concerns. Compatibility should be tied to the exact material grade and exposure condition. A photograph of stainless construction is not a material declaration.

6. Define cleaning, recovery and changeover expectations

Describe the approved cleaning agents, concentration, temperature, contact time, rinse restrictions and whether parts may be removed. Identify allergens, colors, fragrances or active ingredients that require a specific release method. State whether product recovery is important and how residual material will be measured.

For food-related reviews, FDA Food Code cleanability principles can help frame questions about accessible, smooth food-contact surfaces. The Food Code is a retail and food-service model; it does not certify a filling machine or replace the buyer’s process validation.

7. Send enough controlled sample for a meaningful trial

Agree the quantity needed for priming, adjustment, the measured run, cleaning observations and retained samples. Package and label the material for safe shipment. Record any difference between the shipped sample and the intended production product. The test report should preserve product identity, conditions, settings, measurements, rejects and open questions.

Use the peristaltic, piston and magnetic-pump comparison to frame the filling-principle review, the sample test protocol to control the trial and the liquid and paste filling category to compare equipment categories. These pages are selection aids, not universal compatibility claims.

Information to submit with the RFQ

• Product identity, formulation status, lot and storage condition.
• Viscosity method and range at named temperatures.
• Foam, gas, drip, stringing, splash and headspace behavior.
• Particle size, concentration, settling and agitation limits.
• Wetted-material, hazard, cleaning and cross-contamination inputs.
• Container, target fill, tolerance, accepted-output condition and sample quantity.

Send the liquid data sheet and sample plan to MUJIU. Unknown values can remain marked for confirmation; they should not be replaced with assumptions in the quotation.