Robotics & factory automation
We never recommend robotics just because a factory wants to adopt AI. For every application we weigh robot vs cobot vs conventional automation vs a process change, and show the payback before you commit.
Manual task: Manual MIG/TIG welding of repetitive joints.
Best fit: A welding robot or cobot suits consistent, medium-high volume joints; manual welding stays better for one-offs and complex fit-up.
Consider: Joint repeatability, part fixturing, fume extraction, weld quality standards.
Benefit: Consistent welds, higher throughput, welders redeployed to complex work.
When not to: If volumes are low or parts vary constantly, improved fixturing and a skilled welder often beat a robot.
Manual task: An operator loading/unloading a CNC, press or injection machine all shift.
Best fit: A cobot or robot tending the machine frees the operator; good when cycle times are long enough to justify it.
Consider: Reach, payload, cycle time, machine interface, safety guarding.
Benefit: One operator runs several machines; steadier utilisation.
When not to: If the operator also does setup and quality, automation may only cover part of the role.
Manual task: Repetitive hand placement of parts into trays, fixtures or packaging.
Best fit: High-speed robots for fast, repeatable placement; vision adds flexibility for mixed parts.
Consider: Part presentation, speed, accuracy, gripper design.
Benefit: Speed and consistency, reduced repetitive strain.
When not to: Low volumes rarely justify the integration cost.
Manual task: Workers stacking boxes onto pallets by hand at line-end.
Best fit: A palletising robot is one of the most proven, fastest-payback cells in a factory.
Consider: Box weight and size mix, throughput, pallet patterns, floor space.
Benefit: Removes heavy repetitive lifting, steady line-end, fewer injuries.
When not to: Very low or highly irregular throughput may not reach payback.
Manual task: Hand packing, cartoning, taping and labelling.
Best fit: Packaging automation when formats are stable and volume is steady.
Consider: Format changes, pack rate, downstream integration.
Benefit: Consistent pack quality, labour redeployed, throughput.
When not to: Frequent format changes can make flexible manual packing cheaper.
Manual task: Moving parts, bins and WIP between stations by hand or forklift.
Best fit: Robots or conveyors for fixed routes; AMRs for flexible internal transport.
Consider: Layout, distances, floor traffic, load types.
Benefit: Less walking and waiting, steadier flow.
When not to: Short distances or low frequency may not justify it — a layout change can help more.
Manual task: Tasks beside people where fencing a full robot is impractical.
Best fit: Cobots work safely alongside operators at lower speed/payload; ideal for shared, lighter tasks.
Consider: Risk assessment, speed/force limits, task suitability.
Benefit: Fast to deploy, flexible, redeployable between tasks.
When not to: For high speed or heavy payloads a guarded industrial robot is usually right.
Manual task: Operators visually checking every part for defects.
Best fit: Vision-based inspection cells for measurable, visible defects at line speed.
Consider: Defect visibility, lighting, speed, acceptance criteria.
Benefit: Consistent checking, documented quality, inspectors on exceptions.
When not to: Subtle or subjective defects may still need a trained inspector.
Manual task: Manual transport of materials across a large facility.
Best fit: AMRs where internal logistics distances and volumes are high and routes change.
Consider: Facility size, traffic, charging, integration with stations.
Benefit: Flexible transport without fixed conveyors, scalable fleet.
When not to: Small sites with short routes rarely justify AMRs.
Manual task: Several manual stations strung together with handoffs.
Best fit: An integrated cell when the whole sub-process is stable and high volume.
Consider: Process stability, bottleneck analysis, maintenance capability.
Benefit: Compact, consistent, lower WIP.
When not to: Automating an unstable process just automates the problem — fix the process first.
Manual task: New automation bolted onto legacy machines that don't communicate.
Best fit: An integration assessment per machine; not every PLC or legacy asset can be connected without engineering.
Consider: Machine age, controls, interfaces, safety re-assessment.
Benefit: Automation that fits the plant you already have.
When not to: Some legacy machines cost more to integrate than to replace — that's an honest finding we surface.
Investment & payback
A robotics business case includes equipment and integration, installation and commissioning, safety equipment, training, maintenance and support, and any recurring software or service costs. Payback is calculated on contribution margin or real cost savings — never on gross revenue.