Closure supply
No cap, incorrect orientation, damaged closure, feeder starvation or transfer failure.
Sustained production evidence
Bottle capping line output validation.
Measure conforming finished bottles over an agreed test window and record the normal events, defects and interventions that influence the result.
Define the evidenceRecord the conditions, responsibilities and approved result before final machinery configuration.
Use production-intent samplesConfirm suitability with the actual bottle, closure and line context.
Carry results into acceptanceUse the same definitions through quotation, trial, FAT, SAT and handover.
Answer first
The useful output figure is accepted finished packs per stated period under stated conditions.
A nominal component speed or fastest isolated cycle does not describe the complete capping process. Output validation should include the supplied bottle and closure formats, the agreed operator method, cap replenishment, normal line states and the quality checks used to decide whether a bottle is accepted.
| Test definition | What to state | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Start and finish | When timing begins, the initial machine and buffer state, when the run ends and whether startup or first-off approval is included. | Prevents a pre-filled buffer or excluded startup from making results incomparable. |
| Pack and format | Bottle, closure, product or fill condition, tooling, settings and the format selected for the run. | Links the result to the actual production configuration. |
| Accepted pack | The visual, dimensional, torque, opening, leak, tamper or functional checks that define conformity. | Stops rejected or unchecked bottles being counted as useful output. |
| Normal events | Cap refill, low-level operation, routine material loading, planned inspection and agreed operator tasks. | Shows sustainable production rather than a protected demonstration. |
| Disturbances | Starved or blocked condition, controlled stop and restart and any agreed recoverable fault. | Reveals whether the line returns to stable production predictably. |
| Interventions | Manual corrections, jam clearing, setting changes, rework, discarded bottles and unplanned stops. | Separates the automatic or standard method from hidden support activity. |
| Result | Accepted bottles, rejected bottles by reason, elapsed time, open items and site-dependent exclusions. | Creates an auditable result that can be compared with the quotation and acceptance criteria. |
Count defects by cause
Use the quality plan to explain lost output instead of reporting one reject total.
Placement and thread
Crooked, high, cross-threaded, incomplete pump or trigger insertion, or incorrect ROPP cap position before forming.
Application quality
Outside the approved torque or opening method, poor ROPP formation, damaged liner, leak or tamper-feature defect.
Line handling
Unstable bottle, jam, transfer damage, missed inspection, reject failure or downstream blockage affecting the pack.
Use the existing quality-control guide to define the defect categories before the test.
Factory and site use
Keep the same evidence structure even when the available conditions differ.
Factory testing can establish machine configuration, format handling and the interfaces available in the supplier environment. Site testing confirms the final utilities, operators, product, conveyors, controls and downstream restrictions. The records should make those differences explicit rather than presenting the two results as though the conditions were identical.
Combine this guide with the cap-feeder acceptance test, controls and interlocks guide and buffering guide. Carry the agreed test into the FAT and SAT schedule.