Step-by-Step Guide to Choosing the Right Industrial Automation Solutions
Industrial automation decisions shape throughput, quality, safety, and long-term operating cost. When we choose the right industrial automation solutions, we set up our plant for stable performance, easier troubleshooting, and predictable expansion. When we choose poorly, we inherit downtime, integration problems, and a growing pile of workarounds.
This guide walks through a practical, end-to-end selection process for industrial automation systems, from scope and requirements to vendor evaluation and rollout planning.
Step 1: Define the Business Outcome and the Automation Scope
We begin by stating the outcome in operational terms. That means writing targets we can measure on the shop floor: OEE, cycle time, scrap, changeover time, unplanned downtime, energy usage, or audit findings. Then we define scope precisely.
We document where automation will apply: a single machine, a full line, packaging, utilities, warehouse interfaces, or multi-site standardization. We state boundaries: upstream and downstream handoffs, data that must be shared, and equipment that must stay untouched. Clear scope prevents a common failure mode: buying a strong platform that still misses critical interfaces.
We also label the automation type. A plant may need one or more of these:
Discrete automation (assembly, robotics, packaging, inspection)
Process automation (batch, continuous, utilities, dosing, mixing)
Hybrid automation (food, pharma, specialty chemicals, consumer goods)
Step 2: Map the Current Process, Constraints, and Failure Points
Before we select technology, we map reality. We capture the current process as it runs, not as it was designed. We list constraints that shape system design:
We record cycle times, takt, product variants, changeover rules, critical quality parameters, and utility limits. We document environmental factors such as dust, washdown needs, temperature ranges, vibration, and electrical noise.
Most importantly, we write down where problems happen. We list top downtime causes, recurring alarms, sensor failures, jam points, rejects, and manual interventions. This becomes our “must-fix” list. It directly informs choices in PLCs, sensors, robotics, machine vision, and operator interface.
Step 3: Build a Requirements Pack That Vendors Can Quote Cleanly
We create a requirements pack that removes ambiguity and forces apples-to-apples proposals. A strong pack includes:
Functional requirements: sequences, interlocks, recipes, mode control, alarms, data logging, manual override rules, and expected operator actions.
Performance requirements: throughput, accuracy, repeatability, response times, allowable stops, restart behavior, and quality inspection tolerances.
Interface requirements: field devices, valve manifolds, drives, robots, printers, scales, analyzers, barcode scanners, and any existing controllers that must remain.
Data requirements: what must be reported to SCADA, MES, ERP, or a data historian; sampling rates; retention periods; traceability fields; batch records; and audit trails.
Compliance and safety requirements: safety functions, validation obligations, electronic records, and access control rules.
This pack keeps us from paying for “assumed scope” later.
Step 4: Select the Right Control Architecture (PLC, DCS, PAC, or Hybrid)
Control architecture is the backbone of industrial automation solutions. We select based on process type, required determinism, and integration needs.
For fast discrete control with tight timing, we typically align around a modern PLC or PAC with integrated motion and safety. For complex process areas with many loops, high availability, and standardized operations, a DCS may fit better. Many facilities use a hybrid design: PLCs for machine control, a supervisory layer for coordination, and a plant-wide system for visualization and data.
We also define network architecture early: segmentation between IT and OT, industrial Ethernet standards, time synchronization, redundancy, and remote access rules. A solid architecture prevents random point-to-point links and fragile “temporary” switches that become permanent.
Step 5: Choose the Supervisory Layer (HMI, SCADA, and Historian) With Operator Reality in Mind
A system can be technically correct and still fail if operators struggle with it. We define the supervisory layer with usability and response speed as priorities.
For machine-level operation, we specify HMI standards: screen templates, alarm rules, naming conventions, and consistent navigation across assets. For line or plant monitoring, we select SCADA that can handle tag volumes, user permissions, trending, reports, and thin-client access if needed.
We also define historian needs: compression rules, event capture, and integration connectors. When traceability matters, we make sure the data model supports genealogy, batch context, and time alignment across sources.
Key deliverables here include alarm rationalization, setpoint management rules, and a consistent tag naming pattern that supports maintenance.
Step 6: Evaluate Robotics, Motion, and Machine Vision Based on the Real Use Case
When we consider robotics, we specify the job first: payload, reach, speed, end-effector design, guarding, part presentation, and tolerance stack-up. We determine whether we need collaborative robots, industrial arms, SCARA, or gantry systems. We also confirm cell safety design: light curtains, scanners, gates, safety PLC integration, and lockout.
For motion control, we validate whether standard VFDs are enough or whether servo control is required. We define axis count, coordination, homing, recovery behavior, and maintenance access.
For machine vision, we validate lighting, camera placement, lens selection, and reject mechanisms. We define defect types, false reject tolerance, image storage, and inspection speed. We also confirm how vision results feed into quality records and traceability.
Step 7: Set OT Cybersecurity Requirements Before Vendor Selection
OT security is now part of procurement. We specify baseline controls aligned with common industrial security expectations such as ISA/IEC 62443 practices.
We define segmentation, firewall rules, secure remote access, credential management, patch approach, backup rules, and logging. We require secure configuration baselines for controllers, servers, and operator stations. We also define how vendors will handle service access, including approval flows and session recording where appropriate.
We also confirm ownership: who maintains accounts, who rotates passwords, who manages certificates, and how updates will be tested before production rollout.
Step 8: Demand Interoperability and Integration Proof (Not Promises)
Most automation programs fail at interfaces, not at control logic. We therefore validate integration at the protocol and data model level.
We specify required protocols such as OPC UA, Modbus TCP, PROFINET, EtherNet/IP, or vendor-specific fieldbus needs. We define what must integrate with MES, ERP, LIMS, CMMS, or WMS. We require sample payloads: tag lists, event schemas, and transaction rules.
If a vendor claims compatibility, we ask for evidence: reference designs, tested connector versions, and a small proof-of-integration plan. Integration proof saves time and reduces the late-stage scramble of ad-hoc scripting.
Step 9: Define Safety and Compliance Criteria as Acceptance Gates
Safety is engineered, verified, and documented. We define target safety performance using appropriate standards such as ISO 13849 or IEC 61508, depending on the system. We specify safety functions, required response times, and validation methods.
We also define compliance needs relevant to the operation. In regulated environments, we state expectations for audit trails, user roles, electronic signatures, and validation documentation. Even outside strict regulation, we define documentation depth: electrical drawings, network diagrams, software backups, FAT/SAT protocols, and maintenance manuals.
We convert these into acceptance gates that must be met before handover.
Step 10: Compare Vendors Using a Weighted Scorecard
We use a scorecard to keep selection objective. We evaluate across technical fit, delivery strength, and lifecycle support.
Typical scorecard sections include:
Technical alignment: architecture fit, determinism, scalability, safety design, cybersecurity baseline, and integration readiness.
Project delivery: delivery plan realism, engineering capacity, commissioning method, test approach, and risk handling.
Support model: response time SLAs, spare parts strategy, training depth, and post-go-live coverage.
Total cost of ownership: licensing, support fees, hardware lifecycle, upgrade path, and ease of maintenance.
We also include “operational friction” measures: clarity of diagnostics, quality of documentation, and ability for our maintenance team to work without constant external help.
Step 11: Validate With FAT, SAT, and a Real Commissioning Plan
We treat testing as a design tool, not a final checkbox. We define FAT (Factory Acceptance Test) and SAT (Site Acceptance Test) criteria with pass/fail rules.
We require:
Simulation or staged testing where possible
I/O checks, interlock tests, and safety validation
Alarm behavior tests and recovery tests
Data integrity checks to SCADA/historian/MES
Performance checks at target throughput and typical product variants
We also plan commissioning in phases: dry run, controlled production trial, ramp-up, and stabilization. If downtime windows are tight, we plan parallel work, pre-wiring, pre-staging, and rollback procedures.
Step 12: Plan Training, Documentation, and Long-Term Support From Day One
Automation success depends on how well our team can run and maintain the system after go-live.
We require role-based training: operators, maintenance, engineering, and supervisors. We insist on usable documentation: wiring diagrams, network maps, tag dictionaries, alarm lists, backup and restore procedures, and change control steps.
We also define spares and lifecycle planning: controller models, firmware baselines, PC images, licenses, and service contracts. A well-defined support plan reduces downtime and prevents knowledge being locked inside a vendor’s team.
A Practical “Right-Fit” Checklist for Industrial Automation Solutions
When we finalize selection, we confirm these points are true:
We have a clear scope and measurable targets tied to operations. The control architecture matches the process type and timing needs. The HMI/SCADA layer supports operator speed and consistent troubleshooting. Integration to MES/ERP is defined with real data rules. OT cybersecurity requirements are written and enforceable. Safety functions are specified and testable. Vendors are scored with a consistent method. FAT/SAT and commissioning are planned with pass/fail gates. Training, documentation, and long-term support are part of the contract, not an afterthought.
