How should you review 38 and 40 gsm air fryer liner documentation?
Paper weight is one item in a liner specification. Zhongji lists 38 gsm as standard and 40 gsm as available for its air fryer paper liners. Both belong to the same base-paper series and share the stated report group. That product description should be read together with the original submitted samples named in the reports. This guide helps you prepare a document review and identify questions for the quotation. It does not turn a laboratory summary into an instruction for cooking or a certification of every possible finished product.
What does the published paper specification establish?
The listed material is virgin wood pulp with double-sided food-grade silicone coating. The colours are natural brown and white, and the product page states that there are no optical brightening agents. Record the selected basis weight and colour in your inquiry, along with shape and complete dimensions. These are the published choices for the range. A basis-weight choice does not by itself establish an advantage in strength, cooking outcome, temperature resistance or use duration. If your brief requires a particular performance criterion, describe that criterion as a question to confirm.
Why should you keep the submitted-sample description?
A report identifies the sample that was submitted for an assessment. Zhongji's quality page asks buyers to match the report to the selected product, paper grade and sample colour. Preserve that identification when you summarize the result in your own approval record. The product page says that 38 and 40 gsm papers share the same base-paper series and report group, while retaining the original submitted-sample descriptions and dates. Do not rewrite a submitted 38 gsm sample as a separately tested 40 gsm finished liner merely because the products share that group.
Which air fryer paper report summaries are published?
The following references come from Zhongji's quality page. Use them to request the relevant full copies, rather than treating the table as a substitute for reviewing those documents.
| Laboratory and date | Identified sample | Published assessment or result |
|---|---|---|
| Bureau Veritas, 7 November 2025 | Brown paper from an air fryer liner | Target PFAS substances not detected in the submitted sample |
| Intertek, 21 April 2026 | Brown air fryer paper liner | Met the specified EU PFAS / POPs assessments |
| SDQI, 12 October 2025 | Natural-colour 38 gsm air fryer paper tray | Met the tested enterprise-standard requirements; no charring or sticking at 220 °C |
| LCT, 10 November 2025 | Brown and white air fryer paper samples | Met FDA 21 CFR 176.170 requirements |
What can you say about the published heat result?
The SDQI summary for the natural-colour 38 gsm air fryer paper tray reports no charring or sticking at 220 °C. It lists GB 4806.8-2022 and Q/ZJZY 001-2025 in the assessment information. Retain the sample, laboratory and date beside that result. The public summary does not state heat exposure duration. It therefore does not supply a complete time-and-temperature instruction, or establish a universal maximum setting for every appliance. Ask for the full report and the conditions relevant to your intended use before preparing any instructions or additional claims.
How should PFAS wording be reviewed?
Use the actual assessment and finding for the identified sample. The Bureau Veritas summary concerns brown paper from an air fryer liner and says that target PFAS substances were not detected in that submitted sample. The Intertek summary concerns a brown air fryer paper liner and its specified EU PFAS / POPs assessments. Keep those descriptions visible. A broad statement about every colour, grade, product or possible substance would go beyond these summaries. Ask which documentation matches the item you intend to order and which exact wording can be supported by it.
How does the FDA reference differ from a blanket certification claim?
The LCT reference says that submitted brown and white air fryer paper samples met FDA 21 CFR 176.170 requirements, with the report issued on 10 November 2025. State the assessment and the samples instead of replacing them with an unrestricted certification badge. During review, keep a copy of the report with the approved specification and packaging text. If a destination or intended use calls for an additional requirement, include that requirement in the inquiry. The published reference cannot answer an unspecified question about every market or every product configuration.
How can you organize the review for a selected liner?
Create a record that begins with the liner shape, complete dimensions, 38 or 40 gsm, and natural brown or white. Add a list of the requested reports and their identified samples. For each proposed statement on the pack, write down the document that supports it and any limits that need to remain visible. Mark unresolved questions for the quotation conversation. This method keeps a product choice, a laboratory result and an artwork statement connected, while allowing a requirement to remain pending until the relevant documentation has been reviewed.
Which questions should stay open until the full documents are reviewed?
Ask for exposure conditions where your intended use requires them, and ask about the exact grade and colour represented by the supplied reports. Confirm whether any additional testing is needed for the selected specification and destination requirements. Ask for dimension tolerances separately from laboratory assessments, because a report summary does not replace the drawing or sample approval. Keep uncertainty written as a question, rather than using an unsupported temperature, duration, compatibility statement or certificate name to complete the brief. A clear pending item is more useful than an apparently complete but unverified claim.
How do you request matching documentation?
Full report copies are supplied with the relevant quotation. Send the liner specification, intended use, destination and the documentation you need to sales@zhongjipaper.com. Include any proposed packaging claims you want reviewed against the reports. Once the documents and sample are available, retain the agreed product description and original report identifiers together. This gives your team a consistent reference for product selection, artwork review and the final order specification.
Review all liner specifications · Prepare a packaging inquiry