How will bids be evaluated?

{ "general": [ "Service provider must have expertise in mining health and safety, particularly in winder rope assessment.", "Must demonstrate capability to conduct research and deliver actionable outcomes.", "Compliance with South African legal and regulatory requirements (e.g., VAT registration if applicable)." ], "teamQualifications": [ "Project leader and team must have relevant qualifications (e.g., engineering, materials science, occupational health and safety).", "Experience in mining research, rope testing, or related fields is required.", "CVs and copies of qualifications must be attached." ], "financial": [ "Budget must be detailed, realistic, and aligned with project scope.", "Costs must be justified and auditable." ] }

Mine Health and Safety Council Gauteng Tender

___ Appointment of a service provider to undertake research project coe 210502 “assessment and review of winder rope discard criteria, testing procedure and condition assessment protocol”

The project involves conducting research to assess and review winder rope discard criteria, testing procedures, and condition assessment protocols. The goal is to improve health and safety in the South African mining industry through actionable research outcomes.

- Submit a completed proposal template with executive summary, project plan, and financial breakdown (VAT status and proof if applicable). - Deliver research outcomes addressing winder rope discard criteria, testing procedures, and condition assessment protocols. - Include a literature review, research methodology, and detailed milestones (initiation, draft report, final report, and close-out presentation). - Provide cvs, qualifications, and a signed declaration from the proposing organisation. - Outline a plan for transferring research outcomes to the south african mining industry. - Ensure financial summary includes HR, capital, operating, and sub-contractor costs (if applicable). - Proof of VAT registration is mandatory if VAT is charged; NO VAT may be charged if not registered.

___ Appointment of a service provider to undertake research project coe 210502 “assessment and review of winder rope discard criteria, testing procedure and condition assessment protocol”

Submit the following returnable documents as part of your proposal: completed proposal template, executive summary, detailed project plan, financial summary (including VAT status and proof of VAT registration if applicable), CVs of project team members, copies of relevant qualifications, and a signed declaration by the proposing organisation.

The project requires a research proposal addressing the assessment and review of winder rope discard criteria, testing procedures, and condition assessment protocols. Key deliverables include: research outcomes, methodology, literature review, project milestones (initiation, draft final report, final report and close-out presentation), and a plan for transferring research outcomes for implementation or dissemination in the South African mining industry.

Provide a detailed financial summary including: total project cost (excluding and including VAT), breakdown of human resources (HR) costs, capital costs, operating or running costs, and sub-contractor costs (if applicable). Proof of VAT registration must be provided if VAT is charged; if not VAT registered, no VAT must be charged.

{"closingDate":"06 July 2026","closingTime":"11h00","briefingSession":"{\"date\":null,\"time\":\"10:00 am\",\"venue\":null,\"is_compulsory\":false}"}

https://teams.microsoft.com/meet/370984793576535?p=VwBnh6qWZSu1ZOBVQd

{"name":null,"email":"[email protected]","phone":"0984793576","department":"of Mineral and Petroleum Resources (DMPR) on mine health and safety","address":"sal and other"}

Returnable Documents: Submission of fully completed Invitation to Bid (SBD 1) Comply Do Not comply, Fully completed SBD 6.1 (Preference Claim Form), Comply Do Not comply, Bidder must complete the detailed pricing Schedule (SBD Comply Do Not comply, (CV STATING NUMBER OF YEARS OF EXPERIENCE MUST BE ATTACHED), 4 CRITERIA 4: QUALIFICATIONS OF THE MECHANICAL ENGINEER 15, QUALIFICATIONS OF THE MECHANICAL ENGINEER (ATTACH COPIES OF THE, QUALIFICATIONS),

Less than Bachelor's degree or no qualification = 0 points

B7 Maple Place, 145 Western Service Road, Woodmead, Sandton, 2080 correct delivery address. If the bid is late, it will NOT be accepted for consideration by MHSC. The tender box is generally open weekdays at the below delivery address.

1.1 Introduction to the mine health and safety council

The Mine Health and Safety Council (MHSC) is a national public entity (Schedule 3A) established in

terms of the Mine Health and Safety Act, No. , as amended. The MHSC is mandated to advise

the Minister of the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources (DMPR) on mine health and safety

(MHS) issues in the mining industry, relating to the development and implementation of the MHSC annual

MHS research programme, reviewing and development of MHS legislation and dissemination

(knowledge and technology transfer) of MHSC research outcomes to improve MHS conditions in the

South African Mining Industry (SAMI).

Winders are used extensively for the transport of persons, material, ore and waste into and out of mines.

Winder ropes are a critical component in the safe operation of hoisting systems in underground mines.

These ropes, primarily made of high-strength steel, are subjected to continuous cyclic loading, bending,

torsion, corrosion, and wear, all of which contribute to their gradual degradation and eventual failure

(Chaplin, 2005).

Winder configurations vary by drum and rope design, and examples include drum winders, Blair multi-

rope (BMR) winders, and Koepe winders. Winder ropes are critically important, and their selection,

installation, inspection, maintenance, and testing are governed by stringent standards and regulations.

The standards and regulations were originally based on the best available knowledge, experience, and

research at the time of their development. While significant advances have since been made in steel

metallurgy, rope construction, and inspection technologies, leading to improved rope performance; the

standards, particularly South African National Standards (SANS) 10293 and SANS 10294, have not

evolved accordingly. As a result, current discard criteria and testing methodologies may no longer reflect

the capabilities of modern rope technologies.

Recent findings suggest that wire rope degradation mechanisms are far more complex and dynamic than

previously assumed. As detailed by Showkat (2021), degradation often stems from the interplay of fretting

fatigue, corrosion, plastic deformation, and wear, with factors such as bending over sheaves and fleet

angles significantly accelerating fatigue failures. The limitations in the current South African standards

may lead to premature discard of serviceable ropes, or worse, late discard of compromised ropes, thus

increasing the risk of catastrophic failure.

Moreover, Chaplin (2005) highlights that hoisting ropes undergo multi-modal fatigue including tension-

tension, torsional, and bending fatigue compounded by operational variables like load variability, sheave

geometry, and rope construction. The cumulative impact of these factors is often underestimated in

standard discard criteria, which primarily consider broken wire counts and diameter reductions in

isolation.

Given these insights, there is a compelling need to update and align discard criteria with modern

engineering research and operational realities in South African mines. The absence of standardised test

protocols for non-destructive evaluation (NDE) tools such as magnetic flux leakage (MFL) and ultrasonic

testing, coupled with outdated inspector training materials, further exacerbates the problem.

The South African National Standards on winder ropes and the training manuals for winder ropes

inspectors, have not been updated in over 20 years, even though extensive research has been conducted

(though not exhaustive, as certain aspects were not covered) during this period. These standards are:

SANS 10293:1996 Code of practice - Condition assessment of steel wire ropes on mine

winders.

SANS 10294:2000 Code of practice - The performance, operation, testing and maintenance

of drum winders relating to rope safety.

Given the advancements in winder rope design and manufacturing over the past 20 years, coupled with

increased but previously limited adoption of Koepe winders, it is now essential to conduct research that

verifies and quantifies performance data from real-world operations. This historical operational data will

provide a critical foundation for updating and aligning the relevant SANS standards with current industry

practices and technological developments. The aspects already identified as requiring research include,

but are not limited to the following:

1. SANS 10293 – current standard requires revisions to address practical issues in rope inspection

and discard criteria.

2. Triangular strand ropes - current diameter reduction/discard criteria do not distinguish between

plastic deformation and material loss. This leads to premature rope discard.

3. Ropes with steel cores - diameter reduction mainly from abrasive wear, not always affecting

strength, criteria too strict, causing unnecessary replacements.

4. Non-spin ropes - no conclusive or standardised discard criteria for broken wires despite past

research (including SIMRAC projects), safety and reliability risks.

5. Lifespan enhancement - doubling-down practice technique extends rope life but is underused due

to mistrust in back-end terminations, this may be a missed opportunity for rope longevity.

6. Inspector training curriculum - outdated manuals, which are not aligned with new diagnostic

technologies or modern failure modes, inspectors lack current knowledge and tools.

7. Magnetic rope testing (MRT) - reliability issues due to inconsistent calibration and lack of

centralised testing facilities, risk of inaccurate defect detection on winder rope discard criteria,

testing and condition assessment.

2. Part a: the contract

2.1 Context of this procurement

The MHSC seeks to appoint a service provider to undertake research project project CoE 210502

“Assessment and review of winder rope discard criteria, testing procedure and condition assessment

protocol”.

2.2 Contract period

The estimated duration of the project is 18 months. The 15 months will be allocated towards research

work and 3 months on MHSC administrative duties.

2.3 Detailed specifications/scope of work

2.3.1 Conduct a comprehensive review of local and international literature on winder rope condition

assessment, including the performance, operation, testing, maintenance and discard criteria

of winder ropes in the mining and other relevant industries.

2.3.2 Review current winder rope discard criteria, testing procedures, and condition assessment

protocols to identify limitations. Propose improvements aligned with international standards

and benchmarked against SANS 10293.

2.3.3 Review the discard criteria for diameter reductions due to plastic deformation of the outer wires

of triangular strand ropes, with the following objectives:

Investigate the strength loss due to diameter reductions from plastic deformation

of the outer wires of the rope and recommend adjusted discard criteria.

Test verification of the recommend adjusted discard criteria.

2.3.4 Review the discard criteria for diameter reductions due to abrasive wear, with the following

objective:

Investigate the strength loss due to diameter reductions from abrasive wear of the

rope and recommend adjusted discard criteria.

2.3.5 Review the discard criteria for broken wires in non-spin and compact strand ropes, with the

following objectives:

Revisit the model proposed in SIMRAC research project GAP 5021 and apply it to

establish discard criteria for non-spin ropes and compact strand ropes, including

those classified as non-spin.

Engage with suppliers of non-spin and compact strand ropes to obtain input on

existing discard criteria. In collaboration with these suppliers, collect appropriate

rope samples at the point of discard and conduct tensile testing on the samples to

validate or refine the proposed revised discard criteria.

Conduct tensile strength testing on clove hitch and cow hitch rope terminations

using three rope constructions (triangular, ribbon, and compact strands). Compare

the measured strengths to calculated maximum back-end tensions during

doubling-down operations to determine safety factors for each rope type and

termination.

2.3.6 Identify key gaps in existing training modules for winder rope inspectors to ensure alignment

with current practices, techniques, procedures, and applicable legislation. Develop improved,

up-to-date training modules for winder rope inspectors, based on the findings, ensuring

alignment with current practices, techniques, procedures, and applicable legislation.

2.3.7 Review existing independent mechanical and rope testing laboratories, along with their rope

testing protocols. Identify gaps in current practices and provide recommendations to address

and close these gaps.

2.3.8 Conduct a hybrid workshop (in Gauteng) with relevant stakeholders, hosted by the service

provider, to discuss preliminary findings and solicit further information.

2.3.9 Recommend revisions to the winder rope discard criteria, testing procedure and condition

assessment protocol.

2.4 Expected reseach outcomes

The expected outcomes of the research are as follows:

2.4.1 A report on project initiation.

1https://mhsc.org.za/sites/default/files/public/research_documents/Gap%20502%20Discard%20criteria%20for%

20mine%20winder%20ropes%20Report_0.pdf

2.4.2 A report on literature review as outlined in 2.3.1.

2.4.3 A report on current limitations and proposed improvements as outlined in 2.3.2.

2.4.4 A report on discard criteria for diameter reductions due to plastic deformation as outlined in

2.3.3.

2.4.5 A report on discard criteria for diameter reductions due to abrasive wear as outlined in 2.3.4.

2.4.6 A report on discard criteria for broken wires in non-spin and compact strand ropes as outlined

in 2.3.5.

2.4.7 A report on identified key gaps in existing training modules and develop improved, up-to-date

training modules for winder rope inspectors as outlined in 2.3.6.

2.4.8 A report on the existing independent mechanical and rope testing laboratories and their rope

testing protocols as outlined in 2.3.7.

2.4.9 A report on the conducted workshop as outlined in 2.3.8.

2.4.10 A report with recommendations as outlined in 2.3.9.

2.4.11 A draft final report.

2.4.12 A final report.

3. Part b: the pricing

Pricing instructions

1. Applicable currency: All prices shall be quoted in South African Rand (R).

2. Completion of pricing schedule: Bidders shall complete the pricing schedule in full, inserting

all the information required therein.

3. Price Quotation Basis: total prices quoted must be inclusive of all applicable taxes including

VAT, less all unconditional discounts, plus all costs to deliver the services and/or goods. Where

imported goods/services are to be used, and pricing is subject to exchange rate fluctuations,

the exchange currency against the Rand must be stipulated, as well as the exchange rate at

the time of bidding. The portion of the bid price subject to exchange rate fluctuations must be

stated.

4. Submission of pricing: bidders must submit their pricing proposals with the technical proposal.

The pricing folder must be clearly labelled as such.

BID PRICE SCHEDULE (SBD 3.1 Firm Unit Prices)

The following Schedule of Prices must be completed by the Tenderer. The total price must include

everything necessary to complete the terms of the Specifications or scope of work.

Activities as per expected project outcome estimated price

A report on project initiation R

A report on literature review R

A report on current limitations and proposed improvements R

A report on discard criteria for diameter reductions due to plastic R

deformation

A report on discard criteria for diameter reductions due to abrasive R

wear

A report on discard criteria for broken wires in non-spin and compact R

strand ropes

A report on identified key gaps in existing training modules and develop R

improved, up-to-date training modules for winder rope inspectors

A report on the existing independent mechanical and rope testing R

laboratories and their rope testing protocols

A report on the conducted workshop R

A report with recommendations R

A draft final report R

A final report R

Total excluding VAT r

VAT r

Total including VAT r

TOTAL BID PRICE (VAT Inclusive): R..........................................................

Prices quoted are fully inclusive of all costs including applicable taxes and disbursements

and other overheads. (Please note that all prices quoted should be inclusive of Value Added

Tax (VAT) for the duration of the contract. Where applicable the price should include Supply,

Delivery, Maintenance, and any other costs relating to this bid.

Price changes whether because of CPI, PPI, industry extensions or expansions will be allowed

in terms of the signed contract by both parties.)

4. Part c: bid selection process

4.1 Bid preparation and submission

4.1.1 Number of bid documents: 1 X Original and 2 X copies of the same original (Hard

copies) – Three.

4.1.2 Number of bid documents: 1 X (Electronic Copy) of the original document in PDF

(USB) – One.

4.1.3 Number of Bid documents: 1 X pricing proposal (Hard copy) – One.

NB: Both technical proposal and pricing proposal must be submitted separately (two

envelope system).

A digital version on USB containing the bid document and all other supporting

documents (fully submitted bid proposal with its attachments) must be provided of

all tender documentation within the bid envelope. These serve as the original sets

of bid documents and form part of the contract.

4.2 Bid closing

4.2.1 There shall be no public opening by the MHSC of the bids received.

4.2.2 There shall be no discussions with any enterprise until evaluation and

adjudication of the proposal has been complete.

4.2.3 Any subsequent discussions shall be at the discretion of MHSC. Unless specifically

provided for in the proposal document, bids submitted by means of telegram, telex,

facsimile or similar means shall not be considered by MHSC.

4.2.4 All bids shall close on the specified date and time as stipulated in the bid document.

4.2.5 Bids received after closing time and date will be classified as LATE and will not be

considered.

4.2.6 Bids submitted in any other manner other than the specified address (tender

box) shall not be accepted.

4.3 Administrative compliance (returnable documents)

Administrative compliance/responsiveness will be tested based on returnable documents

submitted and signatures on the Bid documents.

At this stage the verification is to review bid responses for purposes of assessing compliance

and governance with RFB requirements, whereby a bidder will be disqualified if they do not

fully comply, it must be determined what documents are required to be returned by Bidders.

Bids will be verified for compliance with the procedural requirements of the bid, which entails

the completion and/or submission of the returnable documents and schedules specified in

the Returnable Documents and Schedules Checklist below. No award will be done without

complete provision of returnable documents and any schedules.

Returnable documents are categorized as follows:

Submission of fully completed Invitation to Bid (SBD 1) Comply Do Not comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit the fully completed and signed SBD1 (Invitation to Bid)

Fully completed and signed Bidders’ Disclosure form (SBD Comply Do Not comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit the fully completed and signed Bidders Disclosure

(Sbd 4)

Fully completed SBD 6.1 (Preference Claim Form), Comply Do Not comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit the fully completed preference claim form, points must be

correctly claimed and the points for the specific goals must be supported by a valid B-BBEE

certificate or a certified sworn affidavit. Bidders should ensure the points are correctly claimed for the

specific goals and information is captured correctly and information is true. False information may

result in the bid being disqualified.

Bidder must complete the detailed pricing Schedule (SBD Comply Do Not comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit and attach to the bid response fully completed pricing

Schedule (SBD 3)

The recommended bidder, where applicable, will be requested to sign and complete

the SBD 7 contract form upon award.

Submission of fully completed Contract Form (where Comply Do Not

applicable) comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit and attach the fully completed and signed and

initialled SBD 7 (Contract form)

4.4 Mandatory compliance – central supplier database

Bidders are required to be registered on the Central Supplier Database (CSD) of National

Treasury prior to submitting their bid (open tenders). Failure to being registered on the CSD

and failure to submit the requested proof of registration on CSD information will lead to

disqualification. (Please provide proof of registration on the Central Supplier Database). Only

suppliers who are registered with the Central Supplier Database (CSD) will be considered for

this bid. Bidders who are not registered on CSD, will be disqualified.

4.5 Mandatory compliance – tax status verification

Bidders are required to submit their tax compliance status with their bid in the form of a Tax

Verification PIN from SARS or CSD supplier number which must be captured in the SBD 1.

MHSC only conducts business with bidders whose tax matters are in order. Failure to comply in

terms of tax obligations will render your bid non-responsive and disqualified. It is the responsibility

of the bidder to ensure they are tax compliant at time of submitting their response.

4.6 Protection of personal information act, (popia)

MHSC adheres to the Protection of Personal Information Act, (POPIA) requirements

regarding personal information which came into effect 1 July 2021. As MHSC, we are committed

to protecting your privacy and ensuring that personal information collected is used properly,

lawfully, and transparently.

4.7 Occupational health and safety

The service provider acknowledges that he is fully aware of the provisions of the Mine Health and

Safety Act .MHSC promotes a culture of occupational health and safety in the mining

industry. The service provider acknowledges that he is fully aware of the provisions of the OHS

Act and that he is an employer in his own right with duties and responsibilities as

prescribed in the Act.

5. Part d: bid evaluation process

The evaluation process will be conducted in various stages. To move to the next stage of evaluation,

the previous stage of evaluation must have been fully complied with.

5.1 Required experience

The service provider must have at least 5 years’ experience in conducting applied research or consulting

and the project team must have members with expertise in the following areas:

Minimum of 10 years’ experience in mechanical engineering, with specific experience in

winder rope condition assessment and testing in the mining sector.

Minimum of 10 years’ experience in safety management and exposure to winder rope

conditions assessment and testing in the mining sector.

NB: Bidders should note that the above is not an evaluation criterion, however bidders should take note

of the requirements to be able to render the services. The evaluation criteria is stipulated in the next

section below.

References

Chaplin, C. R. (1995). Failure mechanisms in wire ropes. Engineering Failure Analysis, 2(1),

45–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/1350-6307(95)00004-A

Huang, K., Peng, Y., Chang, X., Shi, Z., Zhou, Z., Lu, H., Tang, W., Wang, G., & Zhang, X.

(2024). Fretting wear behavior and strength degradation of helical contact steel wire in wire

rope under different corrosive media and time-varying conditions. Wear, 550–551, 205413.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wear.2024.205413

Showkat, S. N. (2021). Damage and failure of steel wire ropes [Master’s thesis, Politecnico di

Torino]. Polito Webthesis. https://webthesis.biblio.polito.it

Wang, D., Zhang, D., Wang, S., & Ge, S. (2013). Finite element analysis of hoisting rope and

fretting wear evolution and fatigue life estimation of steel wires. Engineering Failure Analysis,

27, 173–193. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.engfailanal.2012.08.014

5.2 Evaluation process

The evaluation process will comprise of the following phases:

Phase 1: Functionality Evaluation.
Phase 2: Pricing and Specific goals Evaluation

5.2.1 Functionality/technical evaluation phase 1

For the proposal to be considered for the next level of evaluation, bidders must score minimum of 70%

overall in the below technical/functional evaluation criteria in order to progress to the next evaluation

phase.

The tender will be evaluated in accordance with PPPFA in line with the following functional criteria on

80/20 principle.

NO criteria weighting

1 criteria 1: company experience 5

Experience of the service provider or collaborator in applied

Research or consulting (company profile stating number of years

In applied research or consulting must be attached):

More than 5 years’ experience of the service provider in applied research or consulting

= 5 points

5 years’ experience of the service provider in applied research or consulting = 3 points
Less than 5 years’ experience and no company profile= 0 points

2 criteria 2: reference letters 5

Signed and verifiable reference letters on valid letter heads with

Contactable details from organisations where previous similar or

Related research work was conducted by the service provider

(Attach verifiable reference letters):

5 or more reference letters = 5 points
4 reference letters = 4 points
3 reference letters = 3 points
Less than 3 reference letters or no reference letters = 0 points

Note: Letters that do not meet all the criteria as stipulated above will not be

considered, and will qualify for 0 points

3 criteria 3: team member experience in mechanical engineering 15

Mechanical engineer with a minimum of 10 years’ experience in

Winder rope condition assessment and testing in the mining sector

(Cv stating number of years of experience must be attached):

More than 10 years’ experience in winder rope condition assessment and testing in

the mining sector = 5 points

10 years’ experience in winder rope condition assessment and testing in the mining

sector = 3 points

Less than 10 years’ experience in winder rope condition assessment and testing in

the mining sector = 0 points

4 criteria 4: qualifications of the mechanical engineer 15

Qualifications of the mechanical engineer (attach copies of the

Qualifications):

Master’s Degree or above = 5 points
Honours degree or Post Graduate diploma = 4 points
Bachelor's degree or B-tech = 3 points
Less than Bachelor's degree or no qualification = 0 points

5 criteria 5: experience in safety management and exposure to 10

Winder rope conditions assessment and testing in the mining

Sector

Experience in safety management and exposure to winder rope

Conditions assessment and testing in the mining sector. (Cv

Stating number of years of experience must be attached):

More than 10 years’ experience in safety management and exposure to winder rope

conditions assessment and testing in the mining sector = 5 points

10 years’ experience in safety management and exposure to winder rope conditions

assessment and testing in the mining sector = 3 points

Less than 10 years’ experience in safety management and exposure to winder rope

conditions assessment and testing in the mining sector = 0 points

6 criteria 6: qualifications of the team member with experience 10

In safety management and exposure to winder rope conditions

Assessment and testing in the mining sector

Qualifications of the team member with experience in safety

Management and exposure to winder rope conditions

Assessment and testing in the mining sector (attach certified

Copies of the qualifications):

Master’s Degree or above = 5 points
Honours degree or Post Graduate diploma = 4 points
Bachelor's degree or B-tech = 3 points
Less than Bachelor's degree or no qualification = 0 points

7 criteria 7: quality of the project proposal (methodology, project 40

Scope and project schedule)

The project proposal must address the following four

Requirements:

1. Clearly defined methodology (design/approach to be taken, participants, datasets,

study sites, instruments, procedures, etc).

2. The proposed methodology must be feasible (number of participants or accessibility

of participants, accessibility of study sites, access to datasets, data collection access,

sample sizes, etc.).

clear timelines, and costing.

(Attach project proposal as per the provided proposal template)

The proposal sufficiently addresses all the four requirements = 5 points
The proposal does not address all the four requirements = 0 points

Note: Proposals that reproduce the scope of work text verbatim, without interpreting or

translating it into a clear methodological approach, will not be considered to have provided

a valid methodology and will be scored = 0 points.

Total 100

5.2.2 Price and preference (specific goals) evaluation phase 2

Bid price proposals are compared on an equal and fair basis, considering all aspects of

the bid pricing requirements. Qualifying bids are ranked on price and specific goals

points claimed in the following manner:

(i) Price - with the lowest priced bid receiving the highest price score as set out in the

Preferential Procurement Regulations 2022.

(ii) Preference - preference points are allocated in accordance with the Preferential

Procurement Policy Framework Act (Act ) and its Regulations 2022 as claimed in the

specific goals claim form (SBD 6.1) are added to the price ranking scores. The points for

specific goals must be supported by a valid B-BBEE certificate or certified sworn affidavit.

A maximum of 80 points will be allocated for price on the following basis:

80/20

Pt−Pmin⬚

Ps=80(1− ) Type equation here.

Pmin⬚

Where;

Ps = Points scored for price of tender under consideration

Pt = Price of tender under consideration

Pmin = Price of lowest acceptable tender

A maximum of 20 points will be allocated for specific goals on the following basis:

The tenderer must indicate how they claim points for each preference point

system in line with the specific goals of the RFQ as outlined in SBD

6.1.

6. Part e: bid conditions

6.1 Conditions and instruction to the bidder

a) Response preparation costs: MHSC is NOT liable for any costs incurred by a bidder in the process

of responding to this Bid Invitation, including on-site presentations.

b) Counter Conditions: MHSC. draws bidders’ attention that amendments to any of the Bid Conditions

or setting of counter conditions by bidders will result in the invalidation of such bids.

c) Collusion, Fraud and corruption: Any effort by Bidder/s to influence evaluation, comparisons, or

award decisions in any manner will result in the rejection and disqualification of the bidder

concerned.

d) Cancellation prior to awarding: MHSC reserves the right to withdraw and cancel the Bid Invitation

prior to making an award. The cancellation grounds include insufficient funds, where the award price

is outside of the objective determined fair market-related price range or any process impropriety.

e) Fronting: MHSC, in ensuring that bidders conduct themselves in an honest manner will, as part of

the bid evaluation processes where applicable, conduct or initiate the necessary

enquiries/investigations to determine the accuracy of the representation made in the bid documents.

___

Appointment of a service provider to undertake research project coe 210502

“Assessment and review of winder rope discard criteria, testing procedure

And condition assessment protocol”

Bid Number MHSC011/2026-2027

Advertisement Date 05 June 2026

Closing Date 06 July 2026

Closing Time 11h00 am

Non-Compulsory Date: 19 June 2026

Briefing Session Time: 10:00 am

rope (BMR) winders, and Koepe winders. Winder ropes are critically important, and their selection,

installation, inspection, maintenance, and testing are governed by stringent standards and regulations.

research at the time of their development. While significant advances have since been made in steel

metallurgy, rope construction, and inspection technologies, leading to improved rope performance; the

standards, particularly South African National Standards (SANS) 10293 and SANS 10294, have not

evolved accordingly. As a result, current discard criteria and testing methodologies may no longer reflect

the capabilities of modern rope technologies.

engineering research and operational realities in South African mines. The absence of standardised test

protocols for non-destructive evaluation (NDE) tools such as magnetic flux leakage (MFL) and ultrasonic

testing, coupled with outdated inspector training materials, further exacerbates the problem.

inspectors, have not been updated in over 20 years, even though extensive research has been conducted

(though not exhaustive, as certain aspects were not covered) during this period. These standards are:

SANS 10293:1996 Code of practice - Condition assessment of steel wire ropes on mine

winders.

SANS 10294:2000 Code of practice - The performance, operation, testing and maintenance

of drum winders relating to rope safety.

Given the advancements in winder rope design and manufacturing over the past 20 years, coupled with

increased but previously limited adoption of Koepe winders, it is now essential to conduct research that

verifies and quantifies performance data from real-world operations. This historical operational data will

provide a critical foundation for updating and aligning the relevant SANS standards with current industry

practices and technological developments. The aspects already identified as requiring research include,

but are not limited to the following:

1. SANS 10293 – current standard requires revisions to address practical issues in rope inspection

and discard criteria.

2.4.1 A report on project initiation.

1https://mhsc.org.za/sites/default/files/public/research_documents/Gap%20502%20Discard%20criteria%20for%

20mine%20winder%20ropes%20Report_0.pdf

2.4.2 A report on literature review as outlined in 2.3.1.

2.4.3 A report on current limitations and proposed improvements as outlined in 2.3.2.

2.4.4 A report on discard criteria for diameter reductions due to plastic deformation as outlined in

2.3.3.

2.4.5 A report on discard criteria for diameter reductions due to abrasive wear as outlined in 2.3.4.

2.4.6 A report on discard criteria for broken wires in non-spin and compact strand ropes as outlined

in 2.3.5.

2.4.7 A report on identified key gaps in existing training modules and develop improved, up-to-date

training modules for winder rope inspectors as outlined in 2.3.6.

2.4.8 A report on the existing independent mechanical and rope testing laboratories and their rope

testing protocols as outlined in 2.3.7.

2.4.9 A report on the conducted workshop as outlined in 2.3.8.

2.4.10 A report with recommendations as outlined in 2.3.9.

2.4.11 A draft final report.

2.4.12 A final report.

3. Part b: the pricing

laboratories and their rope testing protocols

the previous stage of evaluation must have been fully complied with.

5.1 Required experience

The service provider must have at least 5 years’ experience in conducting applied research or consulting

and the project team must have members with expertise in the following areas:

Minimum of 10 years’ experience in mechanical engineering, with specific experience in

winder rope condition assessment and testing in the mining sector.

Minimum of 10 years’ experience in safety management and exposure to winder rope

conditions assessment and testing in the mining sector.

NB: Bidders should note that the above is not an evaluation criterion, however bidders should take note

of the requirements to be able to render the services. The evaluation criteria is stipulated in the next

section below.

Assessment and testing in the mining sector (attach certified

Copies of the qualifications):

Master’s Degree or above = 5 points
Honours degree or Post Graduate diploma = 4 points
Bachelor's degree or B-tech = 3 points
Less than Bachelor's degree or no qualification = 0 points

7 criteria 7: quality of the project proposal (methodology, project 40

Scope and project schedule)

schedules must be completed in full. Should the total bid prices differ, or calculation errors be

identified, the one indicated on the price schedule shall be considered the correct price.

viii. Any bidder who has reasons to believe that the bid specification is based on a specific brand must

inform the MHSC before bid closing date.

ix. No service will be rendered, or goods delivered before an official MHSC Purchase Order has been

issued.

x. All questions regarding this bid must be forwarded to the designated email address within at least

24 hours after the bid has been issued.

xi. It is the responsibility of the bidder to ensure that its response reaches MHSC on or before the

closing date and time of the bid.

xii. The MHSC shall evaluate each responsive submission in terms of the method of evaluation stated

in the bid document.

xiii. if the MHSC amends this bid, the amendment will be publicized as the case maybe on the platforms

which the bid was published. No oral amendments by any person will be considered or

acknowledged.

xiv. The MHSC reserves the right to carry out site inspections or call for supporting documentation to

confirm any information provided by a Bidder in its bid. xv. Bidders may not make any alterations

or additions to the content of this bid document, except to comply with the instructions issued by

the MHSC.

Nb: please note that bid responses must be deposited in the tender box as bid

210502 “assessment and review of winder rope discard criteria, testing

TOTAL BID PRICE (VAT Inclusive): R.......................................................... and other overheads. (Please note that all prices quoted should be inclusive of Value Added Tax (VAT) for the duration of the contract. Where applicable the price should include Supply,

Clearly defined methodology (design/approach to be taken, participants, datasets, study sites, instruments, procedures, etc).

The proposed methodology must be feasible (number of participants or accessibility of participants, accessibility of study sites, access to datasets, data collection access, sample sizes, etc.).

The proposal must sufficiently address all items of the project scope provided in the project terms of reference.

The proposal must have a project schedule comprising all expected project outcomes, clear timelines, and costing. (ATTACH PROJECT PROPOSAL AS PER THE PROVIDED PROPOSAL TEMPLATE)

The proposal sufficiently addresses all the four requirements = 5 points

The proposal does not address all the four requirements = 0 points Note: Proposals that reproduce the scope of work text verbatim, without interpreting or translating it into a clear methodological approach, will not be considered to have provided a valid methodology and will be scored = 0 points. TOTAL 100 5.2.2 PRICE AND PREFERENCE (SPECIFIC GOALS) EVALUATION PHASE 2

Bid price proposals are compared on an equal and fair basis, considering all aspects of the bid pricing requirements. Qualifying bids are ranked on price and specific goals points claimed in the following manner: (i) Price - with the lowest priced bid receiving the highest price score as set out in the Preferential Procurement Regulations 2022. (ii) Preference - preference points are allocated in accordance with the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act (Act ) and its Regulations 2022 as claimed in the specific goals claim form (SBD 6.1) are added to the price ranking scores. The points for specific goals must be supported by a valid B-BBEE certificate or certified sworn affidavit. A maximum of 80 points will be allocated for price on the following basis

Points Allocation: 80 points

B-BBEE Details: ly completed Invitation to Bid (SBD 1) Comply Do Not comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit the fully completed and signed SBD1 (Invitation to Bid)

Fully completed and signed Bidders’ Disclosure form (SBD Comply Do Not comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit the fully completed and signed Bidders Disclosure

(Sbd 4)

Fully completed SBD 6.1 (Preference Claim Form), Comply Do Not comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit the fully completed preference claim form, points must be

correctly claimed and the points for the specific goals must be supported by a valid B-BBEE

certificate or a certified sworn affidavit. Bidders should ensure the points are correctly claimed for the

specific goals and information is captured correctly and information is true. False information may

result in the bid being disqualified.

Bidder must complete the detailed pricing Schedule (SBD Comply Do Not comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit and attach to the bid response fully completed pricing

Schedule (SBD 3)

The recommended bidder, where applicable, will be requested to sign and complete

the SBD 7 contract form upon award.

Submission of fully completed Contract Form (where Comply Do Not

applicable) comply

Substantiation: The bidder must submit and attach the fully completed and signed and

initialled SBD 7 (Contract form)

4.4 Mandatory compliance – central supplier database

Bidders are required to be registered on the Central Supplier Database (CSD) of National

Treasury prior to submitting their bid (open tenders). Failure to being registered on the CSD

and failure to submit the requested proof of registration on CSD information will lead to

disqualification. (Please provide proof of registration on the Central Supplier Dat

Supply Chain Management [email protected]

1. Introduction