Warehousing and Fulfilment Solutions with Robotics & Automation || Average global ROI of 2 years || Free 20min concepts ||
I was asked about the different levels of automation comparing low, medium and high to scope out what fits best? (Apologies for the essay...) This is a common scenario when companies are considering varying levels of mechanisation for their operation. Having a stepped or phased approach seems logical. But why, when presented with three options, the middle/medium offering is chosen more often than not? I often think companies are missing out on easy wins with lower levels of automation or only partially getting the benefits by going for the medium option. I thought I'd break down the options below: Low Automation These are generally picking assisted technologies. These include tools such as Handheld Scanners, Voice Picking, Pick-to-Light, and Order Picking Trucks. They are relatively quick to adopt and easy to change if needed. These technologies are commonplace for companies evolving from a previously basic operation. Companies will find these solutions are still highly dependent on human labour. Medium Automation The MEDIUM solution brings in options like conveyors, sortation, pick AMRs, AGVs, etc. and is often the option which is chosen for companies dipping their toe into automation. Designs are generally using multiple different technologies and are generally quick to implement (less than 6 months). Installed systems tend to be fixed and can be challenging to scale and change over time. While automation completes a portion of the tasks, order fulfilment is still heavily dependent on human labour. High Automation The high automation option minimizes labour as much as possible and is reliant upon robotics, AS/RS, and other integrated technologies to have strong up-times. A turnkey operation can sometimes take a year or more to implement and go-live. Considerable upfront design and engineering efforts are to be expected but require minimal resources once up and running. Highly automated solutions are relatively permanent. Depending on the technology they could be difficult to scale. These kinds of solutions will be goods-to-person like shuttles, AutoStore, ACRs, AMRs etc. While human labour is still needed on a much smaller scale, the up-time of the automation is hugely important. Obviously there is a horses for courses element to all of this but I think going from 0-100 in one step is a hell of a culture shift that most companies aren't ready for. I of course think High Automation is the future and should always be considered but I often chat to clients and they don't see how complex the medium option might be. I'm interested to see what everyone thinks and how ROI is calculated on the various levels.
Business Development Manager at AutoStore I Supporting companies to scale with smart automation I Outdoor Man & Hunter
9moInteresting categorization! The significant risk with medium automation is to implement an AGV/AMR to please internal and external stakeholders without having done the necessary ground work. You dont improve a bad process by replacing the manual forklift with a mobile robot. It is still a bad process. Considering the relatively low cost of one single AMR, there is no strong pressure to analyze and adapt the existing processes.