| Part Identification and Traceability | 15% | Every part should have a unique internal lot or batch reference linked to the drawing revision, production date, material record, and inspection result. | Serialized or batch labels, manufacturing records, revision-controlled drawings, and a documented traceability procedure. | Mixed revisions, counterfeit components, difficult root-cause analysis, and unreliable warranty decisions. | 0–5 |
| Material Certification | 12% | Critical steel, alloy, elastomer, and wear-component materials should match the approved specification and be supported by heat or batch certificates. | Material test certificates, chemical composition, mechanical properties, heat number, and certificate-to-part linkage. | Premature wear, cracking, deformation, corrosion, or failure under rated load. | 0–5 |
| Dimensional Accuracy and Fit | 14% | All critical dimensions, interfaces, bores, mounting holes, and sealing surfaces should conform to the latest approved drawing and tolerance requirements. | Inspection reports, calibrated measuring-equipment records, first-article inspection results, and sample-fit confirmation. | Installation delays, vibration, leakage, accelerated wear, and damage to mating assemblies. | 0–5 |
| Hardness and Heat Treatment | 10% | Wear and load-bearing parts should meet the specified hardness range and heat-treatment condition; hardness should be tested using a recognized method such as Rockwell testing. | Hardness maps, heat-treatment records, test method, test locations, and acceptance limits. | Excessive wear, brittleness, plastic deformation, or reduced fatigue life. | 0–5 |
| Non-Destructive and Functional Testing | 10% | Safety-critical or high-load parts should receive an appropriate inspection method, such as magnetic-particle, dye-penetrant, ultrasonic, pressure, or functional testing. | Test procedures, operator qualifications, calibrated equipment records, results, and nonconformance reports. | Hidden cracks, porosity, leakage, structural failure, and unplanned equipment downtime. | 0–5 |
| Compatibility and Interchangeability | 15% | The part must match the equipment model, configuration, service conditions, interface dimensions, material requirements, and applicable drawing revision. | Cross-reference matrix, dimensional comparison, interface drawings, installation instructions, and application limitations. | Incorrect fit, unsafe operation, premature failure, modification work, or invalidation of equipment requirements. | 0–5 |
| Reliability and Field Performance | 12% | Use verified failure history, mean time between failures where available, warranty returns, corrective-action records, and service-life data under comparable mining conditions. | Anonymized service records, failure-analysis reports, warranty statistics, corrective-action reports, and reference installations. | Unpredictable maintenance intervals, repeat failures, production losses, and higher total cost of ownership. | 0–5 |
| Quality Management and Process Control | 8% | A documented quality-management system should control purchasing, production, inspection, nonconforming output, corrective action, and document revisions. | Current quality certificate, process-control plans, internal audit records, calibration records, and corrective-action procedure. | Inconsistent batches, weak corrective action, undocumented process changes, and recurring defects. | 0–5 |
| Delivery Capability and Supply Continuity | 7% | Evaluate quoted lead time, historical on-time delivery, critical-part stock policy, production capacity, logistics controls, and contingency planning. | Recent delivery-performance records, capacity plan, inventory policy, forecast process, and business-continuity plan. | Extended equipment downtime, emergency freight, production interruptions, and unstable maintenance planning. | 0–5 |
| Warranty, Nonconformance, and Technical Support | 7% | Warranty terms, claim procedures, response times, replacement responsibilities, technical documentation, and failure-analysis support should be defined in writing. | Warranty document, service-level agreement, escalation contacts, claim records, and sample corrective-action reports. | Slow resolution, disputed responsibility, repeat failures, and higher maintenance risk. | 0–5 |