Reaching the testing stage for a vehicle or component is usually the result of weeks or months of design, prototype development, and coordination among different teams within a project. However, a product being considered ready by the development team does not necessarily mean that the test specimen is also ready for testing. The vehicle may be fully operational, or the component may appear satisfactory in terms of its condition and initial functionality, yet the applicable version of the standard may still be undefined, the specimen configuration may not match the project documentation, the required accompanying equipment may be incomplete, or the conditions necessary for installation and execution of the test method may not have been reviewed in advance.
Some laboratory delays and rework originate not during the test itself, but before testing even begins. For this reason, specimen preparation should not be limited to packaging a component or delivering a vehicle to the laboratory. Before shipment, it should be clear what the purpose of the test is, what stage of the project the specimen represents, which standard and version will be used, which configuration must be evaluated, and what decision the test result is intended to support. The answers to these questions determine whether a specimen suitable for a Validation test can also be suitable for Type Approval or CoP.
First Question: What Is the Purpose of the Test?
Before selecting the specimen, standard, or even booking laboratory time, the purpose of the test should be clearly defined. A test may be conducted for product development and identification of design weaknesses, it may form part of a Type Approval (TA) process, or it may be performed for Conformity of Production (CoP). In some cases, the physical test method may be similar, but the purpose of the test and the requirements relating to the specimen and documentation are not necessarily the same.
This distinction is important because simply stating, “We need a specimen for an R17 test,” cannot be expected to provide all the information required for the project. It must be clear at what stage the test is being conducted and what the result is intended to demonstrate. If the test is being performed for design Validation, the engineering team may want to evaluate a particular configuration or even conditions more demanding than the minimum requirements of the standard. If the test is being conducted for Type Approval, the specimen and documentation must be consistent with the Type under evaluation and the requirements of the applicable process. In CoP, the primary objective is to verify the continued conformity of production products with the approved Type.
What Is the Difference Between Validation, Type Approval, and CoP Specimens?
The terms Validation, TA, and CoP are sometimes used during test coordination simply as project names or specimen categories, but each represents a different objective. These differences can affect specimen selection, configuration, accompanying documentation, and even how the test result is interpreted.
Validation Specimen
A Validation specimen is part of the product development and validation process. The objective is generally for the engineering team to evaluate the design against Requirements, operating conditions, or defined scenarios before the product is finalized. Therefore, a Validation specimen is not necessarily a mass-production specimen, and its level of maturity should be appropriate for the purpose of the test. In some projects, the specimen may be a Prototype; in others, parts produced using final Tooling may be used; and at more advanced stages, the specimen may be very close to production condition.
In Validation, it is important for both the laboratory and the project team to understand the exact maturity level of the specimen and which of its characteristics are representative of the final design. For example, if the main structure of a component is production-representative but one connection has been manufactured as a Prototype, this should be clearly identified, because without understanding the specimen status, the test result could be incorrectly generalized to the final product. Validation may also have objectives beyond minimum regulatory requirements; for example, the engineering team may evaluate design Margin, a specific Failure Mode, or the performance of multiple Configurations.
Type Approval (TA) Specimen
The objective is different in Type Approval. Within the type approval regulatory framework, tests and documentation are used to demonstrate the conformity of a specific Type with the applicable regulatory requirements. The specimen Configuration is therefore highly important and must be consistent with the Type and characteristics forming the basis of the evaluation. Depending on the regulation and the structure of the product family, selecting the Variant or Configuration to be tested may also require careful assessment.
For this reason, changes that may be acceptable in a development test cannot necessarily be made to a TA specimen without review. Replacing a component, changing a material, modifying an attachment point, using an ECU with a different Calibration, or changing a characteristic that affects the test may influence how representative the specimen is of the Configuration under evaluation. In such projects, traceability of the specimen’s identity and specifications becomes significantly more important, and specimen information must be consistent with the documentation forming the basis of testing and approval.
CoP Specimen
Conformity of Production, or CoP, concerns the continued conformity of manufactured products with the approved Type. Once a Type has been approved, it is necessary to ensure that products manufactured in production continue to meet the characteristics and requirements associated with that approved Type. The methods used for controls, sampling, and related testing depend on the applicable regulation and process.
A CoP specimen must therefore be capable of representing the production product. The objective here is not to evaluate an engineering Prototype or the best available hand-built specimen. If a component is selected from production, its history, Configuration, specifications, and relationship with the approved Type are important, and specimen preparation should not alter it in a way that makes it unrepresentative of the production condition being evaluated. Details concerning sampling, the number of specimens, and required tests should also be determined according to the applicable regulation or requirements.
| Specimen Type | Main Purpose | Key Preparation Consideration |
|---|---|---|
| Validation | Evaluate product design and performance during development | The specimen maturity level and Configuration should be defined according to the Validation objective |
| Type Approval (TA) | Demonstrate conformity of the relevant Type with applicable requirements | The specimen must be consistent with the Type/Configuration under evaluation and the related documentation |
| CoP | Verify continued conformity of the production product with the approved Type | The specimen should represent production condition and be traceable to the product and approved Type |
Therefore, the question “Which specimen should we send to the laboratory?” cannot be fully answered without knowing the purpose of the project. A specimen suitable for Validation is not necessarily suitable for TA or CoP.
Define the Test Standard and Applicable Version Before Sending the Specimen
One of the first pieces of information that should be established before testing is the test reference. Knowing a general description such as “seat test,” or even “R17,” is not always sufficient. Standards and UN Regulations are amended over time, and the version, Series of Amendments, or national standard referenced in one project may differ from another. These differences can affect the scope of application, test conditions, required Configuration, or acceptance criteria.
For this reason, the complete standard number, version or year of publication and, where relevant, the referenced Regulation and Series of Amendments should be identified before final specimen preparation. If it is not yet clear which standards apply to the product or which tests are required, TAT’s Table of Available Tests can provide a useful starting point for searching for relevant tests and standards. For projects in which requirements definition or test planning still requires technical review, TAT Engineering and Consulting Services can also be used for an initial project assessment before the specimen is manufactured or shipped.
Check the Scope of Application of the Standard
The fact that a particular test is mentioned in a project does not mean that its standard necessarily applies to every vehicle or component. Standards and technical regulations have a defined Scope of application, and factors such as vehicle category, mass, number of occupants, powertrain type, component type, installation location, or installed equipment may affect the Applicability of a requirement.
This review should preferably be completed before the specimen is shipped. If, after the product arrives at the laboratory, it is determined that the selected standard does not apply to that Configuration or that the test must be performed according to a different reference, the project plan may need to change. Particularly in TA and CoP projects, consistency between the scope of the regulation, the product Type, and the documentation becomes even more important.
Define the Specimen Configuration Precisely
Descriptions such as “complete vehicle,” “front seat,” or “production component” are not sufficient for technical specimen identification. The specimen should have a clearly defined identity to the level relevant to the test, including Part Number, Revision, Variant, left- or right-hand side, installation location, material type, relevant software or Calibration, accompanying equipment, and any other characteristics that could affect the test result.
In Validation projects, this information makes it possible to identify later which stage of the design the result relates to. In TA, it is important for linking the specimen to the Type and documentation under evaluation, while in CoP the specimen should be traceable to the production condition and approved Type. If several visually similar specimens exist within a project, using labels and unique identifiers helps prevent errors during delivery, testing, and reporting.
Do Not Conceal Modifications to the Specimen
Sometimes a specimen has been repaired, modified, or reinforced before being sent to the laboratory. A Bracket may have been changed, an additional Weld may have been added, the component material may have been changed, or the system software may differ from the previous version. Such changes do not necessarily make the specimen unsuitable for testing, but they must be identified and documented so that their effect on the purpose of the test can be assessed.
This is particularly important in Validation, where the development team may specifically want to evaluate the effect of a design change. In TA, a modification must be assessed in relation to the Configuration under evaluation, while in CoP, a specimen-specific modification may call into question whether the specimen still represents the production condition. Specimen preparation should therefore not mean “making the specimen as good as possible by any means”; it should be prepared in a manner consistent with the test objective and the actual status of the project.
Check the Technical Condition of the Specimen Before Transportation
Some problems identified when a specimen arrives at the laboratory are very simple: a bolt or component is missing, a connector is damaged, the battery is discharged, an adjustment mechanism does not work, or the specimen has been damaged during transportation. These issues may have nothing to do with the primary Requirement of the test, but they can prevent testing from starting or extend the project schedule.
Before shipment, perform a technical inspection appropriate to the type of product and record the specimen’s condition. For a complete vehicle, relevant system functionality, battery condition, tire pressure, fuel or charge level, ECU faults, and accompanying equipment may be important. For a component, attachment points, mechanisms, connectors, and parts required for installation or testing should be checked. The preparation checklist should be derived from the test method and the actual requirements of the specimen, rather than from a single generic checklist used for every test.
Prepare the Technical Documentation for the Project
A laboratory does not require the same set of documents for every test, but insufficient technical information can delay test preparation. Depending on the test, required information may include drawings, specimen specifications, Part Number, Revision, installation information, Datasheets, mass and dimensional data, vehicle Configuration, standard documentation, or other specific technical information.
Before shipment, it is advisable to determine which documents must accompany the specimen and which Revision is current. One preventable error occurs when the specimen has been manufactured according to the latest design change, while an older drawing or Specification is sent to the laboratory. In such a situation, even if the test is performed without difficulty, ambiguity may arise when analyzing or reporting the result.
Define Installation Conditions and Fixtures in Advance
In many tests, the way the specimen is installed is part of the test method itself. Position, angle, attachment points, bolt torque, supporting structure, or Fixture can affect the result. Therefore, it should not be assumed that once a component arrives at the laboratory, it can always be mounted on the test equipment and testing can begin immediately.
For example, in the Vehicle Seat Strength Test – ECE R17, the seat itself is not the only relevant element; its installation and attachments are also important under the test conditions. If a Fixture, part of the vehicle floor, a bracket, or additional components are required to install the specimen, this should be determined before the test date. Fabricating or modifying a Fixture at the moment testing is due to begin can both increase project time and increase the risk of creating conditions that differ from the intended test method.
Determine the Required Number of Specimens in Advance
One specimen is not always sufficient. The number of specimens depends on the standard, test type, project objective, and evaluation plan. Multiple Configurations may need to be evaluated, the test may be destructive, or a Validation program may include several different conditions. In CoP, the applicable regulation or process may also specify particular requirements for sampling and specimen quantities; therefore, the required number of specimens should not be estimated solely on the basis of experience from a previous test.
This becomes even more important when the test is destructive. A specimen that has already been subjected to a load or impact may not be suitable for a subsequent test. The number of tests, their sequence, and the possibility of reusing specimens should therefore be determined before shipment so that the project does not stop midway because no suitable specimen remains available.
Test Sequence Can Matter
When a vehicle or component is intended to undergo several different tests, the order in which those tests are performed should be reviewed. One test may affect characteristics that are important for a subsequent test; the component may deform, wear, be assembled and disassembled, or otherwise lose its original condition. Therefore, scheduling tests solely according to the laboratory’s first available time slot is not always the best approach.
In Validation programs, the Test Plan should account for these dependencies. In formal projects, the limitations of the test method and the condition of the specimen must also be respected. If the same specimen is intended to be used for multiple tests, this should be coordinated with the laboratory before the first test begins.
Specimen Transportation Is Also Part of Preparation
A specimen that has been correctly manufactured and inspected can still be damaged by improper transportation. Packaging should be appropriate for the product’s mass, dimensions, sensitivity, and vulnerable areas, and suitable restraints, protective coverings, or special transportation conditions should be used where necessary. For components whose installation orientation or storage condition is important, this information should be clearly indicated on the packaging.
Recording the specimen’s condition before shipment is also useful. Photographs, specimen numbers, and a list of accompanying items help establish what was shipped and its condition at the time of dispatch. This is particularly important for expensive specimens, Prototypes, or products supplied with multiple accessories or auxiliary components.
Coordinate With the Laboratory Before Shipment
The best time to resolve technical uncertainties is while the specimen has not yet been shipped. Before transportation, coordinate the test title, standard and version, test objective, specimen type, Configuration, number of specimens, documentation, accompanying equipment, and installation requirements with the laboratory. If any of these items are still unclear, it is better to resolve them at this stage than to have the specimen arrive at the laboratory while the project waits for a decision.
On the TAT website, you can review the List of Available Tests and submit initial project information for review through the Customer Care and Request Submission System. Answers to some general questions about the testing process are also available in the TAT FAQ.
Before Delivering the Specimen, These Questions Should Have Clear Answers
Ultimately, before a vehicle or component is sent to the laboratory, the project team should be able to answer several simple but important questions without ambiguity:
What is the purpose of the test: Validation, Type Approval, CoP, or another objective?
Which standard, Regulation, and version will be used for the test?
Is the standard applicable to the product and Configuration being evaluated?
What exactly are the specimen’s Part Number, Revision, Variant, and maturity level?
Does the specimen match the submitted documentation?
Has the specimen been modified, repaired, or otherwise altered?
How many specimens are required, and is the test destructive?
Are a Fixture, auxiliary components, or special equipment required for installation?
Will the test sequence affect the specimen’s suitability for subsequent tests?
Are the technical documents and information required by the laboratory ready?
How will the specimen be transported, and has its condition been recorded before shipment?
If the answer to any of these questions is still unclear, it is better to resolve it before the specimen is shipped. The cost of a few hours of review and coordination before testing is usually far lower than the cost of a project delay, reshipping a specimen, or repeating a test.
A Test-Ready Specimen Is More Than Just an Undamaged Specimen
Preparing for a test means establishing a clear relationship between the project objective, standard, specimen, documentation, and test method. An undamaged Prototype may be suitable for Validation but unsuitable for CoP; a production component may be selected for CoP but its Configuration may not match the approved Type; and a TA specimen may appear complete while its documentation identifies a different Revision. Therefore, “readiness” cannot be defined solely by whether the product is intact or operational.
The earlier these checks are completed, the more effectively the laboratory can focus on the task it is designed to perform: conducting the test correctly and generating technical data that can be used for project decision-making. If the required tests or specimen preparation conditions for your project have not yet been determined, reviewing the requirements and planning the test before manufacturing or shipping the specimen can prevent many subsequent modifications, delays, and unnecessary back-and-forth.