Case Study: Axle Shaft Supply for a mining contractor in Southern Africa
Source:Case /
Time:2026-09-18
Axle Shaft for A mining contractor in Southern Africa
A mining contractor came to us with a axle shaft programme for Southern Africa. The brief was ordinary and unforgiving at the same time: a fixed launch window, a landed cost that had to survive freight and duty, and a part that had to match an existing sample. This case records what was specified, what went wrong in sampling and how the bulk order landed.
The starting point
- Reorders that did not match the approved sample
- Inconsistent hardness between lots
- Premature wear on the first batch
What was specified
| Part | Axle Shaft |
|---|---|
| Client | A mining contractor |
| Market | Southern Africa |
| Volume | 50,000 pieces across 6 specifications |
| Base material | Neoprene |
| Sampling rounds | 4 |
| Delivery window | 10 weeks from PO to ex-factory |
| Compliance | ISO/TS 16949 |
How it was resolved
- The specification was rebuilt around Neoprene and the tolerance locked before bulk.
- A pre-production sample was approved and kept as the golden reference.
- Production ran with in-line inspection and a mid-run photo report.
- Cartons were packed to the client's own barcode and ratio specification.
- Documentation shipped with the goods instead of after them.
Result
- 50,000 pieces delivered inside the 10-week window.
- Unit cost held within 4.5% of the original quotation.
- Inspection-related rejection stayed under 1.5%.
- The specification is on file, so reorders reproduce the approved sample.
What we would repeat
Lock the material standard before sampling. Once the base changes, every downstream approval has to be redone and the calendar slips.
Planning something similar?
Send the specification you are working to and we will confirm what we can match, what we would change and why.
