EN
CN
ES
First, composition analysis by XRF or titration, confirming silver content and base metal, answering “is it really 925”. Second, nickel release testing for piercing and prolonged skin-contact items, answering “will it sensitise”. Third, heavy metal migration, mainly lead and cadmium, split between substrate and surface coating routes. Fourth, childrens jewelry safety, which beyond metals covers small parts, sharp edges and pull strength.
Each category has its own scope, and not every order needs all four. Confirm destination, sales channel and whether the product is for children before deciding, which saves real testing budget.
Nickel release concerns metal parts in prolonged direct skin contact. EU rules set separate release limits for piercing items and items in prolonged contact with skin, and testing normally screens with EN 1811, preceded by EN 12472 wear simulation when there is a coating. The precise limits and scope should always be checked against the current legal text and the buyers requirement; what matters here is the method logic.
The usual mistake is pooling samples: sending studs and a necklace together and receiving one report that cannot be tied to a specific model. Group by material and process, test a representative piece per group, and list the covered models in the report.
Lead and cadmium limits operate on two levels: content in the substrate and release from surface coatings. Plating, paint and printed graphics follow the coating route with different methods. Childrens items are usually stricter because chewing and prolonged contact are assumed. Silver itself contains no lead or cadmium, but solder, alloy findings, plating chemistry and printed packaging can introduce them, so test the dirtiest components rather than only the main body.
If the product includes zirconia, resin or adhesive, verify those separately. Many failures originate in auxiliaries, not in the silver.
A report describes the sample tested with the material and process at that time. Changing supplier, solder, plating house or plating thickness should trigger re-evaluation. In practice buyers accept reports within about a year but ask for a declaration that materials and processes are unchanged.
Document control therefore matters more than a single test: label every report with the covered models, materials, process and test date so that a material change immediately shows which reports lapse. This is the first thing platform audits and factory inspections probe.
Ask for six items as standard: silver content and base metal declaration, nickel release report where applicable, lead and cadmium migration report where applicable, childrens safety reports where applicable, plating and coating material statement, and a sulphur-free packaging declaration. Add a change-notification obligation requiring advance notice and retesting when materials change.
Attach these to the purchase contract rather than chasing paperwork afterwards. A factory willing to organise compliance documents usually also has a stable supply chain.
Models sharing the same material, process and plating can be grouped under one report, provided the covered model list is included. Once material or process changes, the report no longer applies.
Typical fixes are a nickel barrier layer under rhodium or a copper-based underplate, a change of base metal or solder, then retesting. Never alter a report or swap samples for a retest; platform and buyer audits will catch it.
Beyond lead and cadmium migration, physical safety items such as small parts, sharp edges and pull strength usually apply, depending on destination rules and platform policy. Auxiliaries and prints must be covered too.
The factory issues it based on actual materials and test reports, naming the applicable clauses and coverage with report numbers attached. A declaration never replaces a test report; supply both.
