Build one machine- and test-state-specific acceptance record from identity, controlled revisions and contractual method through closing-state basis, datums, measurement chain, raw readings, result expression, limitations, criterion and final disposition.
Keep drawing dimensions, mold fit, maximum clamping force and measured platen parallelism in separate records. Name the exact machine, configuration and state before agreeing the method, datums, measurement chain, result and disposition.
Build the fixed platen-parallelism acceptance briefNo NEW ORIENTAL IMM platen-parallelism, flatness, measurement instrument, accuracy, repeatability, tolerance, calibration, test service, EUROMAP 9 compliance, ISO 20430 compliance, certification, conformity or passed-acceptance result is claimed.
No fixed closing position, load, fixture, correction, measurement point, repetition count, allowable deviation, default method, default instrument, tolerance or pass/fail rule is supplied. Actual values and methods require controlled project evidence and approval.
The same machine, platen, mold or FAT/SAT file may appear in several records, but each route answers a different procurement question.
| Decision owner | Owns | Must stay separate |
|---|---|---|
| Machine-side platen-parallelism acceptance record | One exact machine, clamping-unit configuration and test state, with its selected method, conditions, datums, measurement chain, raw readings, result expression, limitations, project criterion and disposition. | It does not prescribe a test procedure, prove a supplier result or release another machine, configuration, closing state, mold or production process. |
| Maximum clamping-force acceptance | The separate claimed value, selected force-test basis, machine conditions, measurement chain, raw records, reported maximum-force result and disposition. | A maximum-force record does not prove platen parallelism, flatness, force distribution, tie-bar balance or mold fit. |
| Mold mounting and platen interface | Released platen and mold drawings, tie-bar clearance, usable area, centering, fixing pattern, contact surfaces and the exact mechanical fit record. | Nominal dimensions and a successful fit check do not prove parallelism during closing or a measured result for the machine. |
| Toggle versus two-platen architecture | Clamp architecture, mold access, movement, footprint, maintenance and project-specific operating trade-offs. | An architecture name does not prove parallelism, accuracy, repeatability, platen behavior or suitability for a particular mold. |
| Complete FAT and SAT programme | The full approved machine/cell scope, conditions, instruments, observations, witnesses, deviations, retest and acceptance authority. | This page supplies one evidence register, not a complete FAT/SAT sequence, safety validation or production release. |
| Part quality, process capability and safety | Separate molding-trial evidence, process and quality criteria, safety assessment, safeguards, conformity records and responsible approvals. | One platen-parallelism record does not prove mold life, flash control, part dimensions, process capability, safety, compliance or certification. |
Historical recommendations and the current ISO safety record may frame questions. Only the controlled project record releases a result for the exact machine, configuration and test state.
| Source | Public status | May inform | Cannot release |
|---|---|---|---|
| EUROMAP technical-recommendations catalogue | Current catalogue reviewed 1 August 2026; separately lists EUROMAP 9 (1998), EUROMAP 7 (1995) and EUROMAP 10 (1975) | The document number, historical year, public title and the evidence question assigned to each recommendation. | An ISO status, legal requirement, certification, universal procedure, supplier capability, measured result or project acceptance. |
| EUROMAP 9 (1998) | Official historical recommendation titled for testing platen parallelism during closing | The candidate method-and-edition row when buyer and supplier agree its contractual applicability for the exact machine and state. | A fixed closing position, load, fixture, point, correction, repetition count, tolerance, pass/fail rule or NEW ORIENTAL IMM result. |
| EUROMAP 7 (1995) | Official historical recommendation separately titled for determination of maximum clamping force | A distinct adjacent evidence request where machine-side maximum clamping force matters to the project. | It does not release platen parallelism, surface flatness, force distribution, tie-bar balance, mold fit or an interchangeable EUROMAP 9 method. |
| EUROMAP 10 (1975) | Official historical recommendation for general rules for testing injection moulding machines | A contractual discussion about buyer/supplier test scope, acceptance stage and document disposition. | A universally current procedure, a substitute for EUROMAP 9, a fixed acceptance rule or a complete FAT/SAT programme. |
| ISO 20430:2020 | Published injection-moulding-machine safety standard; current public ISO record confirmed in 2025 | Only the separate safety-scope and standards-evidence discussion for the exact machine and destination market. | A platen-parallelism performance method, measured result, supplier compliance, conformity, certification or acceptance result. |
| Controlled project acceptance record | Machine-, configuration- and test-state-specific evidence agreed by the responsible project parties | The actual identity, method, preconditions, closing-state basis, fixture state, datums, instruments, raw readings, result, limitations, criterion and disposition. | Another machine or state, a universal tolerance, mold-fit result, quality result, safety result or unsupported supplier claim. |
Leave unknowns open. Do not fill them from a drawing, mold-fit observation, standard title, machine-family statement or another project's record.
| RFQ field | Record | Evidence to request |
|---|---|---|
| Exact machine and clamping-unit configuration | Machine identity, clamping-unit architecture, included configuration, relevant revisions and the physical unit presented for acceptance | Controlled identity/configuration record that prevents a family name or another machine from standing in for the tested unit |
| Controlled quotation/drawing revision | Quotation, specification, platen drawing, clamping-unit drawing and amendment revisions that define the purchased and inspected scope | Buyer-approved document index with superseded revisions retained and conflicts still visible |
| Decision purpose and acceptance stage | Buyer decision served, factory/site stage, release boundary and questions deliberately excluded | Approved acceptance matrix showing why the record is needed and which later decisions remain open |
| Selected method and edition | Named method, document number, year or edition, applicability decision, amendments and responsible method owner | Contract-controlled reference; the page supplies no default method and reproduces no protected procedure detail |
| Contractual scope and document precedence | Included parties, responsibilities, deliverables, exclusions, acceptance authority and precedence among purchase documents | Signed requirement matrix retaining unresolved conflicts rather than filling them from generic guidance |
| Machine and environmental preconditions | Required machine state, preparation, environment, stabilization basis, safety controls and limitation owners for the agreed test | Method- and machine-specific approved condition record; this page prescribes no setup value |
| Closing state/position basis | The agreed closing state or position reference, how it is identified and the boundary over which the reported result applies | Controlled method/test-state record; no position, load or closing condition is supplied by this page |
| Platen, mold or test-fixture state | Which platen surfaces, mold or fixture condition, installed components and preparation state apply to the observation | Released configuration record without assuming that an empty platen, installed mold or fixture state transfers to another state |
| Measurement principle | The physical measurement principle, reference relationship, interpretation and declared limitations | Configuration-specific technical statement from the responsible test party without a default instrument or principle |
| Datums and measurement locations | Every agreed datum, reference system, location identity, mapping and responsibility for installed or temporary equipment | Released drawing or method record; no universal point or geometric inference is supplied |
| Instrument identity and range | Instrument manufacturer/model/serial identity, configured range, unit, revision, connection and applicability declaration | Device-specific record from the responsible party; no instrument, range or accuracy is attributed to NEW ORIENTAL IMM |
| Calibration traceability | Calibration or verification record, date/status, traceability statement, applicability and limitation owner | Dated instrument-specific evidence; no interval, laboratory, method, accuracy or traceability claim is supplied here |
| Repetitions and raw readings | The contract-agreed observation count, sequence reference, unrounded raw entries, invalid observations and retained data location | Complete signed/raw record with exclusions explained; this page sets no repetition count or sequence |
| Reported result, expression and unit | The reported parallelism result, how it is expressed, original unit, calculation/rounding treatment and responsible reporter | Machine- and state-specific report clearly separated from nominal platen dimensions and drawing tolerances |
| Uncertainty or stated limitations | Declared measurement uncertainty where supplied, method/instrument limitations, excluded effects and interpretation boundary | Responsible-party statement; absence remains visible and no generic accuracy or repeatability is inferred |
| Criterion/tolerance and responsible approver | Contract source for the project-specific criterion, its expression/unit, approval status, exception authority and named role | Buyer/supplier-approved requirement; no allowable deviation, tolerance or pass/fail rule is supplied by this page |
| Witnesses, deviations, retest, final report disposition and change triggers | Required witnesses, observations, deviations, containment, retest decision, approvals, final report location and events requiring review | Signed disposition record that does not turn a partial observation, unsigned draft or changed machine state into acceptance |
Buyer, supplier and responsible test/acceptance parties own the selected method, safe conditions, instruments, criteria and release.
One exact machine, clamping-unit configuration, controlled revision baseline, closing-state basis and platen/mold/fixture state.
A family name, drawing set or result from another state cannot substitute for the inspected configuration.The agreed method/edition, contractual precedence, preconditions, principle, datums, locations, instrument and calibration record.
A standard title alone does not prove that a method was selected, followed or applicable.Raw readings, reported expression/unit, declared uncertainty or limitations and traceable responsible parties.
Nominal platen dimensions, drawing tolerance and mold fit remain separate from a measured parallelism result.Project criterion, approvals, witnesses, deviations, retest, final report disposition and configuration-change triggers.
One accepted record does not prove maximum force, force distribution, tie-bar balance, production quality or safety.Reviewed 1 August 2026. The EUROMAP catalogue keeps EUROMAP 9 (1998), EUROMAP 7 (1995) and EUROMAP 10 (1975) separate. ISO 20430:2020 is a published machine-safety standard whose current public record was confirmed in 2025; it is not the platen-parallelism performance method. None of these records proves a NEW ORIENTAL IMM result, compliance, certification, conformity or passed acceptance.
The catalogue reviewed 1 August 2026 lists EUROMAP 9 (1998) for platen parallelism, EUROMAP 7 (1995) for maximum clamping force and EUROMAP 10 (1975) for general rules for testing.
Boundary: Catalogue presence supplies a public title and historical year only. It does not establish ISO status, legal force, certification, supplier capability, a universal procedure or a machine result.
The official historical recommendation is the directly named platen-parallelism source that project parties may select contractually.
Boundary: No protected procedure, fixed position, load, fixture, point, correction, repetition count, allowable deviation, tolerance, pass/fail rule or NEW ORIENTAL IMM result is reproduced or inferred.
The official historical recommendation identifies maximum clamping force as a separate machine-side evidence question.
Boundary: It is not equivalent to EUROMAP 9 and does not prove platen parallelism, surface flatness, force distribution, tie-bar balance or mold fit.
The official historical recommendation provides general buyer/supplier testing context whose applicability must be agreed in the contract.
Boundary: It is not reproduced as a universal current procedure, a substitute for EUROMAP 9, a fixed acceptance criterion or a complete FAT/SAT programme.
ISO's current public record identifies the published safety standard and records confirmation in 2025.
Boundary: Its scope is machine safety. It is not the platen-parallelism performance method and proves no measured result, supplier compliance, conformity, certification or acceptance result.
The answers keep drawings, mold fit, maximum force, measured parallelism, production quality, safety and supplier claims in separate controlled records.
No. The mechanical-fit record owns drawings, clearance, centering, fixing and contact geometry. A parallelism acceptance record separately identifies the machine and state, method, preconditions, datums, measurement chain, raw readings, result expression, limitations, criterion and disposition.
No. EUROMAP's catalogue names EUROMAP 7 (1995) for maximum clamping force and EUROMAP 9 (1998) for platen parallelism. They address different evidence questions, and one result cannot be inferred from the other.
No. No parallelism, flatness, instrument, accuracy, repeatability, tolerance, calibration, test service, compliance, certification or passed acceptance is attributed to NEW ORIENTAL IMM. Those fields remain open until controlled machine-specific evidence exists.
No. EUROMAP 10 (1975) is retained as historical general testing context. Its age, applicability and contractual role must be agreed; this page does not reproduce it as a universal procedure.
No. ISO's public record identifies a machine-safety standard, not the platen-parallelism performance method. A title does not prove a measured result, implemented requirement, conformity, certification or acceptance.
This page supplies no default. The contract and responsible technical parties must identify the selected method/edition, applicable conditions and state, datums and locations, instrument and calibration evidence, repetition/raw-reading plan, criterion and approval authority.
Request all seventeen fixed fields: exact machine/configuration; controlled revision; purpose/stage; method/edition; contract precedence; preconditions; closing-state basis; platen/mold/fixture state; principle; datums/locations; instrument/range; calibration; repetitions/raw readings; result/expression/unit; uncertainty/limitations; criterion/approver; and witnesses, deviations, retest, final disposition and change triggers.
Attach the machine and clamping-unit configuration, controlled quotation/drawing revision, purpose and stage, selected method and edition, contractual scope and precedence, preconditions, closing-state basis, platen/mold/fixture state, measurement principle, datums and locations, instrument and calibration evidence, repetitions and raw readings, reported result/expression/unit, uncertainty or limitations, criterion and approver, witnesses, deviations, retest, final report disposition and change triggers. Keep every unconfirmed value, method, instrument, tolerance, compliance statement and result open.
Build the machine brief