Buyer note: confirm assumptions before quoting
Lead time, MOQ, yield, leak-test scope, machining scope, and landed cost depend on the drawing, alloy, inspection plan, annual volume, and destination market. For current supplier facts, review the supplier capability sheet or send an RFQ package.
# Pump Housing RFQ Package: What to Send for a 24-Hour Quote Review
Pump housings are not generic castings. A pump housing RFQ is really a combined scope definition for:
- •casting process and alloy route (often A356 gravity casting for pressure-oriented housings)
- •CNC machining datums and sealing faces
- •leak-test method and acceptance criteria
- •inspection outputs and approval flow
- •volume + timing assumptions that decide tooling and pricing
If any of those items are vague, suppliers quote different assumptions and buyers compare prices that are not comparable.
This checklist helps you send an RFQ package that a supplier can review quickly and quote with fewer follow-up questions.
If you want Bohua to review your package, start here:
1) Drawings: what “usable” means for pump housings
Send both:
- •2D PDF drawing (with revision, tolerances, notes, and sealing requirements)
- •3D model (STEP/STP preferred; IGES acceptable)
For pump housings, add clarity on:
- •sealing lands and O-ring grooves
- •threaded ports, bores, and any intersecting drilled passages
- •critical datums (how machining will locate the part)
- •pressure boundary zones (where porosity or machining exposure can create leaks)
If you can, mark the critical-to-function surfaces directly on the 2D drawing.
2) Leak test scope: the single most misunderstood line in pump housing RFQs
“Leak test required” is not enough to quote accurately.
Include:
- •test medium (air / water / helium)
- •test pressure and hold time (state the method you need, or ask supplier to recommend)
- •acceptance threshold (what counts as fail)
- •sampling plan (100% vs sampling) and traceability expectation
- •whether impregnation is allowed, disallowed, or open to discussion
If you want a deeper leak-test checklist, see: Pump housing leak test RFQ requirements.
3) Machining scope: define datums and “what matters”
Suppliers need to know the machining truth, not just “machining required”.
At minimum include:
- •list of machined faces (sealing faces, mounting pads, cover faces)
- •holes/threads to machine (sizes, thread type, depth, tolerance)
- •critical concentricity / position tolerances (where assembly fit depends on it)
- •surface finish targets (Ra) on sealing or bearing interfaces
For supplier context on machining coordination, see: Casting + CNC machining supplier.
4) Material and heat treatment: be explicit (or say “need recommendation”)
State one of:
RFQ CTA
Have a casting project? Upload your drawing for a fast, structured quote review.
Send the drawing, target alloy, finishing scope, MOQ, and delivery timing. Bohua will review it like a real sourcing project, not a generic contact request.
- •required alloy and temper (example: A356-T6), or
- •acceptable equivalents (if your engineering rules allow it), or
- •“need supplier recommendation based on load/pressure/corrosion needs”
If you are not sure, it is safer to say you need a recommendation than to force a default alloy that later becomes a re-quote.
5) Inspection + approval outputs: what procurement actually needs
Pump housing programs commonly need more than a “pass/fail” shipment.
In the RFQ, tell the supplier what you expect:
- •dimensional inspection report (CMM if needed)
- •material certificate (heat/lot traceability if required)
- •leak-test record format (batch record, serial traceability, or sampling report)
- •PPAP/FAI expectation (only if your program requires it)
Reference page for quality systems: Quality control.
6) Volume and release pattern: what changes tooling and unit price
Include:
- •annual volume range (and whether it is stable or ramping)
- •first order quantity and sample build quantity
- •target incoterm + destination market (so export and packing assumptions are realistic)
- •target SOP date (or “quote for prototype + mass production”)
7) How to submit: a format suppliers can execute
To reduce back-and-forth, send:
- •one email / message with the full checklist items
- •drawing + model attached or linked
- •a short list of open decisions (example: “impregnation allowed? supplier recommend leak test method?”)
Or use the structured form:
Copy-paste RFQ starter (pump housing)
> Part: aluminum pump housing casting + machining RFQ
> Files attached: 2D PDF (rev __), 3D STEP
> Annual volume: __ / year; first order: __; prototype: __
> Alloy/temper: __ (or “recommend”)
> Process preference: gravity casting / low-pressure / recommend
> Leak test: medium __, pressure __, hold time __, acceptance __, sampling __
> Machining: datums __; critical sealing faces __; threads/ports __; finish Ra __
> Inspection: CMM __; material cert __; leak-test record __; PPAP/FAI __
> Delivery: incoterm __; destination __; target timing __
> Questions: (1) supplier recommendation on __ (2) confirm tooling approach + sample plan
FAQ
Can a supplier quote a pump housing from a photo?
Only a rough discussion is possible. For pump housings, leak-test assumptions, machining datums, and tolerance stack-up require drawing review.
Should I request gravity casting or die casting for a pump housing?
If you already have a defined route, state it. If not, ask for a recommendation based on pressure boundary, wall thickness, annual volume, and machining scope. See gravity casting for the common structural route.
Do I need to specify leak test method in the RFQ?
If your program has a defined requirement, yes. If you do not know the method yet, state the operating context and ask the supplier to propose a test method, pressure, hold time, and records.
What is the fastest way to submit a complete RFQ package?
Use the request-quote form and include your drawing package, annual volume, machining scope, and leak-test expectations in the notes.
Project CTA
Need a Reliable Pump Housing Supplier?
Send your drawing for a structured DFM review, quote scope, and project-specific timing discussion.