Roundtable review: Modern machine building

OPENING THE discussion, when asked about the key challenges their machine-building customers face, the panel pointed to a convergence of operational, economic and cultural pressures.

For Andrew Rigby, product manager at Phoenix Contact, the engineering fundamentals remain central. "You've got to mitigate against any potential unexpected downtime," he said, citing site-specific conditions, compliance requirements and the physical constraints of panel design as daily realities. And, he asserted, decentralisation of control architecture is increasingly part of that conversation.

Fabrice Sylvie, head of engineering and service delivery, Europe North West at SKF, brought an economic lens to the discussion, looking at the issues from the perspective of rising operational costs for customers, particuarly in terms of energy and employment.. “We have to be much more efficient when it comes to energy,” he said. Skills shortages compound the problem, he argued, making it essential that suppliers transfer expertise directly to customers and support co-engineering of assets with shorter development cycles. He also highlighted a structural risk often overlooked: "Supply chain fragility is not to be underestimated. We in SKF are regional for regional – we produce in Europe for Europe – and that helps us move away, as much as we can, from the geopolitical challenges we face right now."

Anderson Silva, sales application engineer at Murrelektronik, identified another fundamental barrier: the human one. "The main challenge today is to start to change, because a lot of customers don't want to change, because (what they have) it is working." He drew a parallel that extended well beyond the factory floor: "It's not just for machine builders. For our life, to change is not easy, especially when we are not confident to do it. But sometimes, to reach success, we need to move forward out of our comfort zone."

Industry 4.0

The question of which trends and technologies are having the most immediate impact produced near-unanimous agreement, along with a note of scepticism.

"Industry 4.0 is really what is reshaping the way we look at design and production right now," said Sylvie. "Most probably we're not using the potential to the extent we could." When products can be monitored in real operation, he argued, design cycles can be compressed and improved, but that requires a willingness to act on what the data reveals.

Silva agreed, but also pointed out the gap between rhetoric and reality. "Industry 4.0 is the train that everyone is talking about, but it's funny to say that, because everyone is talking about it but just few people are really doing it." He pointed to the convergence of OT and IT as a defining trend, but stressed that collecting data is only the starting point. "There is one difference between data and information. We can collect data, we can have a lot of data, but how do we transform data and information into something useful?"

Rigby grounded the discussion in practical terms, highlighting the persistence of basic engineering inefficiencies. "We look at a simple thing of just pushing wiring; the error potentials of a standard screw terminal. Is it the right torque setting? Are we getting heat build-up?" The adoption of appropriate communication platforms such as IO-Link, EtherCAT, PROFINET, is essential, he argued, but requires real expertise to implement effectively.

The adoption gap

Another particular theme of the discussion was the gap between technology purchased and technology genuinely deployed. All three panellists had direct experience of customers who owned capable systems but were failing to extract value from them.

Sylvie described a recent visit to a customer who had suffered a critical gearbox failure, and a consequent downtime he estimated at half a million pounds; despite having monitoring data available that could have flagged the problem in advance. "The effort is really to convince the customer that the technology already available today can bring value – it's not only about the cost of that technology, but also about the cost avoidance that comes with it."

As Silva put it: "It's like selling someone a Ferrari but not teaching them how to change the gear. You buy a Ferrari, but you use it like a first-year driver – you're not using the benefit of the car." The result, he noted, is that customers become disillusioned with technology that was never the problem in the first place. "The customer feels unhappy with the technology. They bought it, but they don't know how to use it."

Turning data into action

]The panel also discussed what separates useful data from noise. As Rigby asserted: "If data doesn't trigger an action, it's purely decoration." A production line consuming more power than expected, for instance, may be signalling a motor problem or increased mechanical friction, but only if someone is watching, and only if the organisation is prepared to act.

Sylvie advocated meeting customers where they are on the journey. "It's important to have a proper discussion with the customer – to read, first, where he is in that journey of digitalisation." Customers who are not tracking downtime costs may struggle to see the return on investment in condition monitoring; the job of the supplier, he argued, is to open that window of understanding using cross-industry experience.

Silva favoured an incremental approach to building confidence: "Baby steps. We have something new that we can test, one small part, and then, supporting the customer step by step, they can become confident." He also emphasised the importance of speaking the right language to the right stakeholder. "For the energy manager, money is the most important thing. For the programmer, you explain how easy the technology is to use. We need to talk the same language as the customer."

Compliance

When considering what legislation machine builders need to be aware of, Rigby highlighted regulatory changes that the panel felt were not receiving sufficient attention, particularly in the UK. New IEC standards for surge protection (IEC 61643-11) are set to change by 2027, and the EU Cyber Resilience Act is already reshaping requirements for connected products. "If we're not looking at embracing the new standards and fitting the right components, we're limiting the actual potential and the infrastructure of the plant."

The roundtable's central message was clear: the technologies to improve machine performance, reduce downtime and future-proof operations already exist. The challenge is not invention, it is adoption.

Watch on-demand

This review provides just a taste of what was covered in the webinar, which also included an informative and wide-ranging roundtable discussion, including questions submitted by the audience on the day. If you would like to find out more, you can watch the webinar on-demand for free via the following link:

wbmwebinars.com/modern-machine-building-innovation-efficiency-and-compliance/live